Soon, postgraduate studies may leave the education system and return to their usual field of science, and defending a dissertation at the end of the postgraduate period will again become mandatory. The head of the Ministry of Education and Science, Olga Vasilyeva, announced this at a joint meeting of the Council of the Russian Union of Rectors (RUR) and the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAN).
Today, almost everyone knows that the situation with domestic graduate school is more than unfavorable. Only every fourth or even fifth graduate student defends their dissertation on time, while about half do not defend it at all.
However, according to the new law, this is not necessary: graduate school has become a stage of education, and a graduate student is not a scientific researcher, as before, but a student. And the latter’s job, as Lenin wrote, is “to study, study and study.” And so they poured into graduate school training courses, tests, exams, lectures, seminars... Where can I write dissertations - today's graduate students simply do not have time for this. And then there are the meager scholarships that force the vast majority of graduate students to get a job. There is no other way, because many graduate students already have families...
The impasse in which the system of training domestic highly qualified personnel finds itself requires its immediate reform, the acting director has no doubt. President of the RAS Valery Kozlov: “We need to make a serious decision!” - he said to the approving roar of rectors and academicians.
The Ministry of Education and Science, as it turns out, is ready for postgraduate education reform. “Already this year, we propose, firstly, to cancel accreditation for postgraduate programs (it was the need for accreditation that caused a sharp, several-fold reduction in enrollment in postgraduate programs academic institutions, not familiar, unlike universities, with this practice - ROSVUZ). Secondly, return priority to conducting scientific research in graduate school. Thirdly, return the obligation to defend dissertations,” said Minister of Education and Science Olga Vasilyeva. “In addition, we propose to extend the period of scientific research to 5 years. And after 2018, try to carry out a general reform, for the preparation of which a working group should be created now.”
Rectors of universities and members of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences, having heard the minister’s statement, breathed a sigh of relief: “Graduate studies must return to their previous state,” Kozlov expressed the general opinion.
However, the graduate students themselves were happy about the upcoming changes. Moreover, the return of mandatory protection does not frighten them at all, Denis Fomin, co-chairman of the public association “AAA” or the Autonomous Association of Postgraduate Students, assured ROSVUZ:
“The overwhelming majority of us who went to graduate school to do scientific work, and not hide from the army! But there is practically no science in graduate school now: it’s all classes and exams. Yes, we went through all this while still in graduate school! But now I want not theory, but practical scientific work, I want to learn the practical skills of a researcher. Unfortunately, there is none of this, and many of us, even those who got into the best universities, are terribly disappointed. Well, why was it necessary to destroy the good things we had? The old system must be returned. And if the period allotted for research actually increases to 5 years, it will be very good. It’s easier for postgraduate students in the humanities: if you push them, they can complete their dissertations in 3-4 years. And for techies, the experimental base is always slow. This process is very long: it is precisely because of the experiments that many of us do not have time to defend ourselves on time,” he explained to ROSVUZ.
In particular, training will be extended and time for scientific work will increase. It’s not easy to be a graduate student in Russia: you have to spend time on part-time work and not on science. There are those who even go to study abroad. Will reform help?
The head of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Alexander Sergeev, announced the reform of graduate school. He proposes to extend the studies there to 5-6 years, while reducing the number of lectures and increasing the number of hours for scientific work. Defense of a candidate's dissertation will also become mandatory; now it is optional. Plus, in the first years of graduate school, it would be possible to introduce special measures of financial support for graduate students, the head of the Russian Academy of Sciences believes.
“Humanities” students now study in graduate school for three years, “naturalists” for four. Many nonresidents go to graduate school for the sake of the hostel. Some young people are trying to evade the army - those who have defended their Ph.D. are not conscripted. There are also those who dream of a career as a teacher or scientist - without graduate school you cannot defend a candidate’s dissertation. But it is impossible to live on a graduate student’s stipend—the national average is no more than 10 thousand rubles.
Irina Abankina Director of the Institute for Educational Development, State University Higher School of Economics“Very many universities, if they accept students, do not limit themselves only to scholarships, but also to enrollment as part-time internal research assistants, and indeed pay remuneration for work in scientific research and scientific projects.”
The previous reform took place two years ago. Postgraduate studies were turned into a continuation of the bachelor's - master's degree system. The number of subjects has increased, because of this, the time to write a candidate’s dissertation has become much less, and it may become mandatory, complains MSU graduate student Maxim. At the same time, you have to earn extra money. He has a job at a museum with a salary of 20 thousand, plus he leads private excursions around Moscow, but this is only during the warm season. Many of his friends make a living by tutoring. There is no need to talk about support for scientific projects, says Maxim:
Maxim graduate student of the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University“There is a grant system, but it is extremely difficult to get a grant, and it is a huge responsibility in terms of reporting. After all, already established scientists apply for grants, but this is not so easy for graduate students, only if the supervisor is involved in this. There are more different ones additional items in addition to the main ones, for which minimum candidate exams are taken. You feel a little like a resident of Kafka’s world, who walks somewhere towards the castle for a long time, but along the way something distracts him all the time. If they cut that down, that would be great.”
Reducing the number of lectures could harm both students and teachers, believes Ilya Utekhin, a professor at the Faculty of Anthropology at the European University, which now exists as a research center in St. Petersburg:
Ilya Utekhin Professor, Faculty of Anthropology, European University“If we allow initiatives, when the scientific community itself organizes something new and allows graduate school to be truly educational, then we will really overcome the gap in the field of science and in the field of higher and higher education, which is clearly evident now when comparing Russia and developed countries "
Business FM spoke with those who went to graduate school abroad. A graduate of the physics department of Moscow State University, Diana Grishina in 2013 dreamed of connecting her life with Russian science. But with the prospect of receiving approximately six thousand rubles a month in graduate school, Diana understood that she would have to sacrifice science. She started looking online for offers abroad. Her work in the field of creating three-dimensional photonic crystals from silicon interested Dutch scientists. In many European countries, a graduate student can live peacefully without a part-time job, continues Diana Grishina:
Diana Grishina postgraduate student, graduate of the physics department of Moscow State University“You are hired as a “young scientist”, you have a contract for four years with a fixed salary, there are no lectures, you only teach students yourself sometimes, but at the end you are expected to write a dissertation. When graduate students are recruited, the group already has funding that it won as a grant, that is, it cannot be that the money has run out, there is nothing more for you to do. There are no wars, which I saw a lot in our faculty. Sometimes it seemed to me that there are a lot of scientists in Russia who are mainly busy not with science, but with finding money for science. It is necessary to submit applications much in advance, even for some small things. I remember in the physics department I kept samples in yogurt boxes because we couldn’t buy sample boxes.”
As for increasing the training period, there are both disadvantages and advantages. Among the disadvantages is the status of “eternal student”. The advantage is that everyone will probably have time to complete their PhD. Now some students do not complete the three or four years.
Why we should expect that the quality of postgraduate dissertations will soon decline, how the philosophical understanding of the world is changing among postgraduate students, how postgraduate study is similar to the death penalty and to Cuban vintage cars, the site was told by scientists and teachers who learned that defending dissertations at the end of graduate school will become mandatory.
The other day, Minister of Education and Science Olga Vasilyeva said that now any postgraduate course will necessarily end with the defense of a dissertation. The corresponding provision, according to the minister, and in the near future the document will be published for discussion on the legal information portal.
“I am convinced that graduate school ends with a dissertation; if you cannot defend yourself, then you cannot be a scientist,” the minister said at a meeting with young researchers at the Far Eastern Federal University.
After it was adopted in 2013 new law about education, graduate school began to be considered as the third stage of education, and not as the beginning of scientific work. Both scientists and ministerial officials are confident that Vasilyeva’s predecessors were in a hurry with the reform, and that graduate school needs to return its scientific status. They discussed this issue in detail at a joint meeting of the council of the Russian Union of Rectors and the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences at Moscow State University at the end of June. Then the acting president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Valery Kozlov, carefully called the reform of graduate school hasty and proposed returning specifically to scientific graduate school. Minister Vasilyeva supported this idea and promised to do it, among other things.
It is still unknown when defending a dissertation will become mandatory for graduate students, Deputy Minister of Education and Science Grigory Trubnikov told the site. “We definitely want to discuss this at the Science Council under the Ministry, with the Russian Academy of Sciences, with the Association of Rectors and with the Union of Rectors. This is a complex issue, and the goal here is not to reform this matter as quickly as possible. We will calmly discuss everything and evolutionary way Let's come to research graduate school. When this will happen depends primarily not on the ministry, but on the university and the scientific and academic community,” Trubnikov emphasized.
Is protection really necessary?
The introduction of mandatory defenses is unlikely to improve the quality of dissertations, says Konstantin Severinov, head of Skoltech’s graduate program in the Life Sciences area.
This initiative is harmful and stupid. It will lead to a deterioration in the level of dissertations, since both the supervisors of graduate students and the graduate students themselves will be forced to do hack work in order to fulfill the requirements of the mandatory defense at the end of graduate school.
Konstantin Severinov
Professor at Skoltech and Rutgers University
“The leadership of the ministry should be concerned about the development of measures to improve the quality of education and science in our country, and not about lectures and the desire to achieve meaningless indicators that will allow them to report success “on paper”, worsening the situation in reality,” Severinov believes.
Postgraduate studies should be aimed at defending dissertations, but at the same time it is necessary to make the defense deadlines more flexible, notes Alexey Khokhlov, project director at Moscow State University. “An organization cannot be required to defend a dissertation exactly on the deadline for completing graduate school, as this will lead to a further decline in the quality of defended dissertations. Therefore, this approach is wrong when it is necessary to defend a dissertation on time, otherwise the organization will be punished,” Khokhlov said.
Professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences, leading researcher at the State Astronomical Institute named after P.K. Sternberg Sergei Popov compared the introduction of mandatory protection with vintage cars in Havana. “In many ways, the system of science in Russia in general and graduate school in particular remind me of these machines. And the minister’s attempts to reform something include repairing such machines. You can discuss what color to paint them, you can rearrange the steering wheel with right side on the left, you can change the upholstery on one seat or on the other (depending on the current concept). But all this has nothing to do with the normal automobile industry or the ability of citizens to buy modern car"- commented Popov.
The ministry’s initiative will neither harm nor benefit, noted philosopher and sociologist Grigory Yudin (Higher School of Economics). “This is a useless and harmless initiative, like most of Vasilyeva’s initiatives. It’s still impossible to force anyone to defend themselves, even if you threaten them with the death penalty,” the expert emphasized.
What needs to change in the training of graduate students
Mandatory defense is not the only innovation in graduate school. Changes may also affect postgraduate training programs. The Ministry of Education and Science plans to discuss how to change them with scientists and university teachers. “All the best, of course, will remain. Everything that works, everything that gives effective preparation qualified personnel, of course, all these practices will definitely remain,” promised Grigory Trubnikov.
Nowadays, entrance and candidate exams, compulsory courses and teaching practice raise many questions. To the list of mandatory entrance examinations Many universities include "Philosophy". First-year graduate students take a course in “History and Philosophy of Science” and pass the candidate minimum. However, the quality of philosophical training of graduate students leaves much to be desired. “This exam has always been a mockery of philosophy, it was impossible to prepare for it meaningfully, and the only thing it reliably taught was an aversion to philosophy. Fortunately, some universities, such as the Higher School of Economics, have begun to abolish it as a compulsory exam, and so far no one is complaining that the level philosophical understanding world level among graduate students has decreased,” said Grigory Yudin.
It is possible to introduce subjects that are more relevant for graduate students into the program of compulsory courses, says professor at the University of North Carolina and Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Doctor of Chemical Sciences Alexander Kabanov. “Philosophy, depending on the specialty, may be necessary, but not for everyone. For chemists, biotechnologists, pharmacists (areas that I represent well), instead of philosophy, I would introduce some other courses, modern and more useful for the specialty, which university graduates lack. It could be statistical methods, which, according to my old ideas, are not taught very well, or computer science, or a course focused on the relationship between various disciplines, with the goal of preparing specialists for interdisciplinary, “convergent” research in the future,” says Kabanov.
Kabanov added that instead of philosophy, attention in the training of graduate students should be paid to a foreign language. “Success in philosophy, of course, does not reflect the ability of applicants for creative scientific work. What is more important is the ability to speak well and express one’s thoughts coherently, including in English,” he noted. Konstantin Severinov shares the same opinion.
The level of English proficiency of the vast majority of graduates of Russian postgraduate schools is, to put it mildly, not high, and those who know the language did not learn it thanks to official occupations in graduate school.
Konstantin Severinov
Professor at Skoltech and Rutgers University
Beyond the philosophy and quality of English language teaching, what is also questionable is what graduate students are required to teach. “Pedagogical practice is not mandatory, but possible,” says Alexander Kabanov. - For money and voluntarily. So that willing graduate students are paid for limited quantity teaching hours."
According to Konstantin Severinov, pedagogical practice, on the contrary, should become an important element in the preparation of candidates of science. “Another question is what to organize correctly teaching practice difficult, because it shouldn’t be about washing test tubes or switching slides for the professor. A person with a PhD should in principle be able to give a professional lecture at university level in his area of specialization. It would be great if preparing and delivering a few lectures were part of graduate school. The same goes for managing graduate students. The best way To understand something yourself means to explain it to another,” the scientist believes.
Philosophy and pedagogical practice, according to Sergei Popov, can hardly be considered a problem in Russian graduate school. He believes that in graduate school (mainly humanitarian areas) often go to people who do not plan to build an academic career and engage in scientific research. Moreover, it does not work in Russia " normal system organization of science" and there is no request for graduate students. “This is already evident from the absence of, say, any noticeable number of Chinese-Indian postdocs in Russia. This is a good indicator,” explains Popov.
It is unlikely that reforming graduate school in the scientific direction will change anything, the expert believes. “In the short term, this will lead to simply nothing changing. They will scold the leaders for not providing a sufficient number of protections, but the leaders are already accustomed to being scolded for failure to fulfill some impossible demands like the so-called “May presidential decrees.” Or there will be a stream of very weak defenses,” Popov complains.
Konstantin Severinov also agrees with him. “The “candidates” “baked” according to the new rules will in the future occupy various leadership positions in the higher education system and in science, so the damage from the proposed measures, if they are adopted, will be long-term and will outlive the current minister,” agreed Konstantin Severinov.
Reform of postgraduate education (as well as the system of awarding academic degrees) may give greater autonomy to universities. "Generally latest reform system of certification of scientific personnel shows that we are gradually coming to the conclusion that every university can have own ideas about how he wants to train graduate students, what to ask of them and what exams to take,” comments Grigory Yudin.
According to Alexey Khokhlov, it is necessary to monitor how effective graduate school is in a particular organization. “If it is clear that from year to year graduate students, after studying for three or four years, leave without any protection, do not have any publications and go to work in a place not related to science, this is bad. If they are published regularly throughout the entire period of graduate school, defended, not necessarily on time, but within one, maximum two years after graduation, and after that they use their knowledge and work in their specialty, this is good,” Khokhlov sums up.
The need for graduate school reform is caused by the totality of the changes that have occurred since the main foundations of this institution were consolidated in the 1930s. Firstly, Russian society changed both economically, and in terms of social stratification, and culturally. We have not lived in an industrial-agrarian country for a long time. Despite the unprecedented crisis of the 1990s, Russia remains an urban civilization with a skill-based economy and a heterogeneous and contradictory cultural environment. There is still a significant layer of people with higher education. The number of universities not only did not decrease, but also increased noticeably due to the paid sector Russian education. The need for specialists in the fields of politics, finance, personnel selection, media, mass entertainment, contemporary art, etc., including university teachers and scientists, has grown (or even emerged). A modern market for relevant scientific and educational literature. In such conditions, social science, invariably closely connected with socio-political life - as an institution that produces information, “technology” and a conceptual apparatus both for the sake of “big politics” and for the sake of self-reproduction - acquires everything larger scale and meaning. Back side This process is the progressive standardization of work even in this highly individualized - compared to natural science - sphere. If we consider these changes in an international context - and therefore in the context international competition, - it is reasonable to assume that the transformation of information, including scientific and humanitarian information, into a full-fledged commodity, and its production into an “industry” is unlikely to remain a local phenomenon.
Secondly, like other countries, in Russia the university has turned into a kind of factory for the production of practitioners. On the one hand, there has been a deindividuation of education. Modern technologies University teaching is similar to teaching schoolchildren, because it is extremely formalized (regardless of whether these forms are institutionalized): a university teacher, even the most highly qualified teacher, has less and less time for individual work with students. At the same time, the character naturally changed and significantly decreased intermediate level actually scientific requirements for the student. And although there is a practice of hiring university graduates as scientific workers in various institutions immediately after graduation, in most cases such graduates are not yet capable of independent scientific work and need additional training either in correspondence graduate school or in working together with highly qualified specialists.
Thus, in the conditions of standardization of the work of a humanities scientist, higher education plays the role of a “factory of practitioners” rather than a “factory of scientists.” Soviet and post-Soviet graduate school also does not fulfill this function, being a “tailoring workshop.” A priori, it is assumed that a graduate student, through independent work under the supervision of a supervisor, will develop a scientist in himself. At the same time, selection technologies for graduate school (abstract, entrance exams), approaching the standards of admission to a higher educational institution, are in blatant contradiction with this “soft” pedagogy of self-development. From among the applicants, the one who satisfies a certain set of formal criteria is selected, but then he is required to have completely non-trivial qualities that cannot be established using a formal exam. The contradiction is inherent in the basis of the model itself.
Meanwhile, modern social science has by no means “simplified” compared to the first half of the century or even the 1970s. The number of paradigms has grown significantly, and the conceptual apparatus has become much “thinner”. The mathematization of scientific knowledge and the associated concern for high logical culture (including those where mathematization is either impossible or meaningless) orients towards unconditional clarity and consistency both in the construction of theory and in the design of the object of empirical research. The latter has become less intuitive and more theoretically loaded. Knowledge and skills here, as in other areas, are acquired through constant and well-organized reading, “face-to-face” communication with colleagues and systematic training of analytical skills. Our graduate school does not provide such organization and training. Moreover, we can say that it is not “theoretical”.
Ideological restrictions in the field of social sciences and humanities have become a thing of the past. Now the teacher and student can independently choose their theoretical guidelines. Modern science is distinguished by a multiplicity of paradigms that come into real or imaginary contradictions with each other. To what extent does a modern Russian graduate student have conceptual knowledge of this essence pluralistic theories? IN best case scenario he is not very deeply versed in one or two theoretical approaches and is not focused on mastering the work of opponents (or even “neighbors in theory”). Moreover, he cannot imagine competing paradigms in interconnection. Versatility theoretical training lost - an even more glaring fact against the backdrop of the expansion of the information space due to the Internet, new international services of our leading libraries, an increase in the number of translated publications, the emergence of cultural and educational representations of foreign countries (in St. Petersburg this is, for example, the British Council, Institut Frantçais, etc.) etc.
Modern social science involves a wide range of research methods and techniques. Some of them require special statistical training, others require special knowledge in a particular area. Labor intensity social analysis presupposes the ability to work in a group and, accordingly, proficiency modern techniques communication and scientific management. This is first of all practical knowledge also remains outside the scope of domestic postgraduate “training”.
We have already talked about the close connection of the social and human sciences with socio-political practice. Whatever you think about the examination of socio-political decisions (does it really have anything to do with science?), today it has become a fact of everyday existence. In addition, scientists are successfully trying to play an independent political role, using the results of their research for this purpose. Are our graduate students being taught political responsibility for what they say and write? Are we generally encouraging reflection on the socio-political context of the work of a social scientist and, accordingly, are concerns about “disinterest” being cultivated? scientific view?
Finally, the domestic social and humanitarian community is all in to a greater extent integrates into the international scientific labor market with its centers of strength and weakness. Meanwhile Russian system training of scientific personnel continues to reproduce a weak scientific culture both in terms of fluency in the conceptual apparatus of modern social theory and research methods, and in insufficient knowledge of foreign languages and in the inability to format scientific publications, in a low culture of discussions, manifested in the inability and unwillingness to speak in the opponent’s language, and finally, in the vagueness of the ethical criteria of scientific work.
II. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE REFORM
The main goal of the proposed reform should be a postgraduate course that would allow the production of modern, that is, social and humanities science that is competitive in the global scientific labor market. An ideal scientist, regardless of whether we are talking about a theoretician or an empiricist, must be fluent in the conceptual apparatus of leading scientific paradigms, being able to demonstrate an understanding of their internal logic in independent reasoning. At the same time, he should be instilled with the values of an anti-dogmatic search for truth, freedom (freedom of a professional) in handling the works of his predecessors and contemporaries. He must competently apply modern research methods and techniques, being aimed at pluralism of approaches and creativity. Finally, he needs political responsibility for both science and possible ways its use in “big politics” (i.e., the purposeful formation of a citizen). In our opinion, the values of enlightened criticism of current socio-political practice (both in science as a social institution and beyond) are the most organic for a scientist of this type. Given the international nature of modern social knowledge and welcoming its further internationalization, we believe that a modern Russian scientist should be a cosmopolitan in in the best sense this word, that is, to be aware of one’s responsibility for “ big politics“not only in your country, but also in the world as a whole.
Focusing on this ideal, we can formulate the main objectives of the reform. Firstly, taking into account the scale and significance of modern social and humanitarian knowledge, it is necessary to raise the question of standardizing the training of a scientist. Modern graduate school necessarily involves standard training theory and methods in seminarias and workshops. The theory training program should be universal from the point of view of familiarization with leading scientific paradigms, conceptual development-oriented in terms of their interrelated presentation independent analytical thinking from graduate students. It is necessary to teach even a future empiricist to think theoretically. Methods must be studied practically both in conditions of individual and collective resolution of research problems. Any graduate student - be it a “practitioner” or a “theorist” - must have an excellent understanding of the basic methods of his own and related disciplines. Secondly, the future scientist, regardless of specialization, must free speak English (including the ability to write in it scientific texts) and be able to read and communicate professionally in a second foreign language. In the same vein of internationalization of graduate education, it is necessary to encourage the participation of graduate students in foreign scientific journals, international conferences, expand the number of trainees abroad. Domestic conceptual and methodological innovations should be studied in the context of world science and, where necessary, philosophy. Thirdly, graduate school should provide education politically responsible scientist. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce separate seminars on the history and sociology of social and humanitarian knowledge as a political institution. Graduate students should know how individual scientific theories and even specific studies were used politically in the past - both inside the scientific institution (for disciplined scientists) and outside it (for disciplining rulers/citizens); and how they can be used today. On the other hand, they should know how the philosophical and political preferences of the researcher and the socio-political situation affected scientific practice.
III. FOREIGN EXPERIENCE
Let's look at how postgraduate education is organized in countries that traditionally lead in the field of training scientists (Germany, Great Britain, France, USA). In doing so, we rely on the monograph of the largest specialist in the field of education, Barton Clarke, “Places of Scientific Research.”
With regard to the consistent formalization of postgraduate training, experience USA seems to us the most promising. When entering graduate school, there is a strict selection process by department. In the first two years of study, a graduate student must mainly attend the so-called. classes and pass exams in each of them. The results of the examinations affect the graduate student's receipt of scholarships or the right to work in the department. The organization of many classes allows you to provide a teaching load large number teachers. After attending a certain number of these classes, the graduate student takes the so-called. “exhaustive exam” (a comprehensive exam). It covers several areas of the science being studied. Those who successfully pass the exam are entitled to move on to their own research project, which should turn into a doctoral dissertation. As a rule, all examinations are written, although some departments allow the “exhaustive examination” to be taken orally. (True, American graduate students have no experience passing oral exams and are afraid of it.) The topic of the future dissertation is approved by a special council of the department. The completed dissertation is offered for reading to members of the dissertation committee. The defense procedure is public.
A significant proportion of graduate students enrolled in doctoral programs leave the university before defending their dissertations. In the United States as a whole, approximately 50% of graduate students enrolled in doctoral programs successfully complete their dissertation defense. This proportion varies greatly depending on the university and department. For example, in the mid-1990s, the Department of Sociology at the University of Texas at Austin successfully defended 70% of all doctoral students. Standardization of graduate training, universality of requirements and anonymity of control, provided that the class program is carefully thought out, allows American graduate students to fill gaps in their secondary and university education and acquire the necessary skills of modern scientific work.
At the same time, in Germany and France, the organization of graduate school still remains very similar to the Russian one - albeit from an external, inevitably superficial glance. The main emphasis here is on independent work on the dissertation. The inevitable risks in this case can be corrected: in Germany - very high demands presented to graduate students during exams and when defending their dissertation; in France - a system of compulsory and optional seminars and theses in the first year of preparation of a doctoral dissertation (the so-called “diplomas of advanced training”, assessed on a four-point scale) and the informal nature of the defense of the dissertation itself.
IN Germany decisive role in determining the directions of research belongs to ordinary professors, who select from among the distinguished students those who are most capable of research work - to continue their studies at a higher level. In the structure of German universities there are institutions as independent research institutions with their own budget. In fact, institutes are the same departments. Several institutions can form department Doctors are trained by the institute, not by the department. The university's control over the latter is extremely limited. Students seeking to receive doctorate(Doktoranden) must find a teaching or research position either at the university itself or at a research institution outside the university. Thus, Doktorand actually has the status of a junior researcher. There is competition for such jobs. The duration of postgraduate study is three to five years. The number of seminars that must be attended without fail is small. Most Doktoranden specializing in the social sciences and humanities conduct their scientific work outside the walls of the institute or department, having only nominal contacts with their supervisors. During the postgraduate period, they must establish themselves as full members of the scientific community, which is certified by successfully passing exams and a dissertation.
In case France It is difficult to make clear distinctions between pre-graduate and postgraduate programs. In the 1980s, a five-level university education system was introduced: (1) after two years of university study, the degree DEUG (diplôme d'études universitaires généraies) is awarded; (2) after three years - license degree; (3) after four years - maitrise degree; (4) after five years - for those who want to engage in science - a DEA degree (diplôme d'études approfondies - diploma of advanced training); (5) the next degree - doctorat - requires another 3–5 years of study. Thus, we can say that postgraduate training in France begins after four years of study at a university with admission to a special program for obtaining DEA. For especially gifted students oriented towards scientific research, since 1990 there has been another special program- to obtain the Magistère degree. Students enter this program after three years of university study.
As in Germany, preparation for the doctorat does not require attending formal classes. But at the DEA level, participation in seminar classes- Necessarily. In addition to the thesis, you need to make one or two reports at the seminar of your supervisor. The diploma project is assessed differentially: “excellent”, “good”, “satisfactory”, “unsatisfactory”. This stimulates competition between future scientists. When, after receiving a DEA degree, a student decides to enroll in a doctoral program, he must competitively seek funding (with the help of a professor) and find available work in laboratories (the latter condition is more relevant for natural scientists) or research centers. Grants for graduate students do not go directly to them, but to laboratories (centers) and their directors. Laboratories compete for forfeits, and after they receive them, competition for a source of funding begins between graduate students. Encouraging ambition and competitiveness distinguishes French education at all levels, but becomes especially obvious in graduate school. Also a characteristic feature of the training of doctoral students in the most prestigious educational institutions France is cultivating the openness of the social sciences and humanities to politics. This is also manifested in the exceptional importance of epistemology for the preparation of modern French humanists. Within the framework of relevant seminars, they study philosophical foundations and consequences scientific theories and their possible policy applications. Largely due to this, in France even purely empirical works are theoretically loaded.
IN UK The doctorate is a three-year program in which the graduate student focuses on his or her research project. He is much freer than an American graduate student, bound by rules admission to graduate school, credits for completed classes, examinations and dissertations. Doctoral training in such conditions depends very much on the relationship between the graduate student and his scientific supervisor. This central point in British doctoral programs, a tradition that dates back to the “tutor system” of study at Oxford and Cambridge in the Middle Ages. The doctoral student must pass one exam on the topic of the dissertation, which is taken by two professors - from the doctoral student's university (but not the supervisor) and from another university. Work on a dissertation involves regular meetings between the professor and the graduate student, at which the latter receives advice on the work plan, theoretical model, which forms the basis of the research, bibliography and archives, reviews of finished fragments of the dissertation text. Such “togetherness” makes it possible to “transfer” from a senior scientist to a junior the fundamental ethical guidelines that distinguish a person of science, and to achieve high quality dissertations, the defense procedure of which is public.
To summarize our brief overview, we highlight the benefits of American graduate school for mass produced by scientists, German and French models - for education independent thinker, ambitious and politically responsible scientist, British - to ensure high quality dissertation text and the formation of a moral scientist. These priorities are realized thanks to a system of classes or seminars (USA, France), a high level of requirements in exams and during the evaluation of dissertation texts (USA, Germany, France), competitions for graduate student grants (France), regular contacts between the supervisor and the graduate student (UK ).
IV. WAYS TO IMPLEMENT THE REFORM
The reform of the postgraduate system must be comprehensive and carried out along with the reform of the entire high school. However, this, in our opinion, does not mean that the reform should be immediate and simultaneously affect all aspects of university education and training of scientific personnel. Only in the experimental centers of reform (which will be discussed below) does such simultaneity seem to be an imperative. Of course, it is necessary to reconsider such elements of the organization of graduate school as selection for graduate school, the program and duration of study, qualifying exams, requirements for dissertation work, and financing of training. We will touch on these issues with to varying degrees thoroughness and with different points vision.
SELECTION OF FUTURE GRADUATE STUDENTS.
Several grounds for admission to graduate school may coexist. Any holder of a graduate diploma should be eligible for admission if he passes the entrance examination to a sufficiently high standard and submits an essay (in manuscript or published as an article) demonstrating his scientific skills. Each applicant submits essay in a specialized discipline (two or three author’s pages). Reviewers evaluate manuscripts (articles) according to the following criteria: significance and prospects of the problem posed, conceptuality, logical culture, proficiency modern methods research, general scientific erudition. Only winners of the essay competition are allowed to take the entrance exams.
Entrance exams may still include a foreign language, philosophy, and major. However, the form and content of these exams must change.
Philosophy. It is advisable to include two questions in the ticket - on the history of philosophy and on philosophical aspects profiling discipline for the examinee. For the first question, you need to write - within three to four hours - an essay demonstrating mastery of the conceptual apparatus of a given philosopher (or philosophical movement) and understanding of the internal logic of his method. When working on an essay, the examinee is allowed to use the works of the commented author: a test in philosophy should not be reduced to a simple memory test. The second question is taken orally (after thirty to forty minutes of preparation): the applicant identifies the possible philosophical foundations of the theoretical paradigms existing in his discipline, their connection with known philosophical systems and attitudes and reveals mastery of the methods of philosophical criticism and deconstruction of these “empirical” philosophies.
Foreign language. The level of language proficiency at the time of admission to graduate school should provide the opportunity for improvement to such an extent that by the time of passing the candidate exam, the level of language knowledge meets the criteria necessary for enrollment in graduate school at an average foreign university.
We believe that a foreign language exam should be as formalized as possible. Accordingly, it would be reasonable to take as a sample Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). The minimum number of points allowed for admission would in this case be equal to 450–500 (with 550 required for admission to graduate school at an average American university).
Exam specialties may consist of three parts: a question on the theory of the discipline being tested, a question on methods (in many cases it can be formulated as an empirical task) and, finally, an analysis of a specific case (for an ethnologist or anthropologist this could be, for example, a description of a specific people, region, or what -or a traditional institution, for a historian - analysis of a historical event). Even when answering the last question, the examinee must demonstrate proficiency in the categories of humanitarian and social sciences.
Authors of articles in recognized scientific journals that practice peer review of published work may be admitted to graduate school if they receive lower exam grades than those who enroll on a general basis. This benefit also applies to international and All-Russian Olympiads and competitions, as well as university teachers and employees of research organizations with at least two to three years of work experience. An applicant to graduate school does not have to submit any recommendations.
EDUCATIONAL PROCESS.
First of all, it is necessary to develop modular postgraduate training programs. Meeting the requirements of formalization of postgraduate training, the module principle will make it possible to replace or remove certain blocks of the program depending on the level of postgraduate training and, thereby, maintain an individual approach to training. In any case, such a module should include a network of seminars on theory and epistemology (philosophy, history and sociology of science), a number practical classes on methods and workshops within the framework of collective research projects. Likewise, the module includes classes in English and a second foreign language.
Each graduate student must attend a certain number of seminars and practical classes, which can take the form of lectures, traditional seminars, laboratory work, training, etc. The program of these classes covers the first two years of study. Speciality should include seminars on the theory of the discipline, subdisciplines and a workshop on methods. There are seminars/workshops that are mandatory and those that are attended at the graduate student’s discretion.
Seminars on philosophy/epistemology. Graduate students do not study either the history of philosophy or modern philosophical thought “in its pure form.” The seminar program should be focused on the analysis of the philosophical and socio-political foundations of social and humanitarian knowledge and “empirical” philosophies characteristic of the core discipline. A number of classes are devoted to the philosophical analysis of the categories “science”, “social science/social knowledge”, “philosophy”, “ordinary (conscious) consciousness” and their relationships. Graduate students should focus on analyzing the relevance of categories developed on the basis of logical-formal sciences and natural sciences for the study of the phenomena and practices of social and humanitarian knowledge. Equally, it is important for them to understand what the differences between “philosophy” and “social science” can (or should) be and how they have been related historically. The other side of the same problem is the possible relationship between “social science” and “everyday (consciousness.” From a philosophical perspective, the “real” socio-political status of “social and humanitarian knowledge” in the 18th–20th centuries is considered. Particular attention is paid to the philosophical justifications of this or that scientific paradigm and philosophical disputes and conflicts in the social sciences and humanities. Possible connections between the philosophical attitudes of the scientist and his scientific credo are explicated. The seminar examines the actual philosophical context of these preferences, due to which they are “purified” (through criticism of contradictions and inconsistencies) and, radicalized, acquire the outlines of a philosophical model or approach. Graduate students are encouraged to construct alternative philosophical justifications for the scientific paradigm being analyzed, while at the same time deconstructing the dominant interpretation. The socio-historical and directly philosophical contexts of paradigmatic disputes and conflicts in science are analyzed and ways of their resolution or removal (from a philosophical point of view) are outlined. Within the framework of socio-historical consideration special attention is paid to the “political” functions of ideological justifications in science, that is, the existing regimes for guiding scientific practice and their possible alternatives (in in this case philosophical analysis closes with sociology and history of science). As in other seminars, graduate students regularly write essays and give presentations. At the final test or exam (in writing), subjects must demonstrate a good knowledge of modern philosophy of social sciences, the ability to independently pose philosophical questions based on the material of their core discipline and critically comment on philosophical discussions relevant to their field of knowledge.
Seminars on history and sociology of the core discipline. The seminar program should be structured around the course in the philosophy of social sciences. Several seminars are devoted to the most influential paradigms in modern history and sociology of science with an emphasis on the history and sociology of the social sciences. Graduate students are then introduced to the conceptual history of the institutionalization and autonomization of their discipline and study its contemporary sociology and anthropology. A number of seminars are dedicated to the analysis of the science being studied as a socio-political practice modern society. This one is possible short course is assessed based on the total points received by students for essays and reports.
We proceed from the fact that in the near future, in the field of most social and human sciences, a researcher will be able to work successfully only if he masters at least two foreign languages. Moreover one the language - English as modern Latin - must be proficient at a fairly high level, as we discussed above. Classes in this language should be modeled after classes in English Academic Writing, the goal of which is to teach graduate students the culture of scientific writing in English. In addition, it is necessary to improve the speaking skills of graduate students. This may take the form of them presenting short messages and discussing these messages in a foreign language. Training should include various shapes communication with native speakers of a foreign language.
Regarding second foreign language, it seems sufficient to train graduate students to read texts of average complexity in it and communicate on simple everyday topics. This can be accomplished over two semesters with a teaching load of four hours per week. The graduate student can carry out further improvement in this language independently.
Related disciplines may include such compulsory classes as methods of teaching the discipline of a graduate student’s specialization, social statistics (most Russian social scientists and humanists are extremely weak in this area), a workshop on teaching the culture of writing scientific papers, as well as a number of other social and humanitarian disciplines chosen for study by oneself graduate student (for example, linguistics or economics for sociologists, etc.).
In addition, we think it is necessary to introduce a workshop in the same block in which graduate students would learn how to find funding for scientific research and write applications for grants, as well as planning and organizing the work of small scientific teams (departments, sectors, laboratories, research groups). It would probably be useful not only for graduate students, but also for workers who already have a scientific degree.
In large cities such as Moscow and St. Petersburg, a division of labor is possible between institutions for teaching certain postgraduate classes. For example, a graduate student of the St. Petersburg branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, in addition to his institution, can attend some classes at the Oriental Faculty of St. Petersburg State University, at the European University and at the Institute of History material culture RAS.
It is inevitable that our graduate training program will eliminate such a specifically Russian uniform training of scientific personnel as a job application. Perhaps one of the consequences of the liquidation of this institute will be a noticeable reduction in the number of purchased dissertations. In fact, it is quite difficult to sit in parliament or head a ministry and attend graduate classes at the same time. At the same time, it seems inappropriate to limit postgraduate training to full-time training only. Part-time postgraduate study is also possible, when the postgraduate student has a different form of activity as his main occupation. In this case, the terms of his training will be extended over time. It is also necessary to provide for the possibility of attending postgraduate seminars/workshops by specialists who simply want to improve their qualifications (at on a paid basis). Such a student can receive a certificate in the prescribed form after passing the exam in the subject he attended. If in the future this student enrolls in graduate school, the certificates received will exempt him from repeating the courses taken.
We consider it important to pay attention to the ratio different levels post-graduate education. IN English speaking countries There is a practice when a person with a bachelor's degree in one discipline continues his education in graduate school in another discipline. It is likely that this practice will become widespread in Russia. However, a serious problem in this case becomes the problem of compatibility of different levels of education. In our conditions, during such transitions, a graduate student will clearly experience a lack of knowledge in the discipline of specialization. Perhaps this should be compensated for by compulsory defense of the thesis project ( master's thesis) in the same science on which the candidate's thesis is supposed to be defended. In general, we believe that it is necessary to welcome those cases where a dissertation candidate’s pre-graduate and postgraduate training took place in different disciplines, since such a situation will contribute to the interdisciplinary integration of the social sciences and humanities.
In Russia, it is customary to grade candidates' exams. Such an assessment has no meaning for a graduate student (of course, if it is not “unsatisfactory”). Graduate student performance should be assessed either through undifferentiated credit or on some higher-level scale. IN the latter case this assessment should somehow influence the graduate student's financial support and career prospects.
In order to increase the competitiveness of learning, it is advisable to regularly organize essay competitions in specialized disciplines. These competitions should be given a national scale. Their laureates would be automatically exempt from attending the relevant seminar and would be awarded a special scholarship and foreign internship at public expense. The winning essays would be published with the support of the national Ministry of Education. The laureates of several competitions, after defending their dissertation, would receive the most prestigious places in the capital's universities and institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
The third year of study should be brought closer to the German and French models in terms of the beginnings of independence in choosing priorities in working on a dissertation. It is advisable to borrow from the British model the practice of regular meetings between a graduate student and a supervisor in order to discuss fragments of a dissertation or articles on the topic of a dissertation, as well as relevant books and articles published in lately. Graduate students who systematically ignore such meetings and show no progress in their work are expelled regardless of their previous successes. Third-year students should be encouraged to participate in teaching first- and second-year graduate students by inviting them to present at specialized seminars or entrusting them with organizing and conducting optional seminars and workshops. They should also be involved in participation in collective scientific projects implemented at a given university or academic research institute, depending on the topic of the dissertation being prepared or for the sake of practice in modern scientific methods.
TRAINING FINANCING.
During the Soviet period, payment for the education of graduate students was carried out either directly by the educational institution, or, in
The Ministry of Education and Science has prepared a plan for the reform of one of the most traditional forms of education in the post-Soviet space - graduate school. No wonder - at the moment master's theses Only a third of graduate students are protected, while others use their status for completely different purposes. How exactly is it proposed to reform graduate school and what is the expected result?
The day before, the Ministry of Education and Science was considering options for reforming graduate school. According to the authors of the reform, innovations will help level out a number of negative aspects that Russians applying for an academic degree are forced to face.
Today, a university graduate with a master's or bachelor's degree can enroll in graduate school, having previously passed the candidate's minimum. During three years of study, he is required to write a scientific paper in his specialty, publish at least two scientific articles in specialized journals, collect documents for admission to defense, conduct at least 50 hours of teaching work. Each of the points carries difficulties and risks, which is why only 30% of those admitted to graduate school are ready to defend their dissertation.
“I don’t know a single graduate student who was able to write a scientific paper in three years, despite the graduate plan. After three years, the applicant received a certificate from the institute, which extended the period of study, candidate of historical sciences Alexander Chausov told the newspaper VZGLYAD. – In addition, it was impossible to immediately defend a scientific work; there was a waiting list of applicants on dissertation councils. But even after the defense we had to wait a long time official documents certifying an academic degree."
As a result, graduate school often becomes a screen behind which young people hide from military service. And even those who sincerely wanted to connect their lives with science, encountering obstacles over and over again, give up the idea of getting a scientific degree.
Representatives of the scientific community explain this by saying that the result often does not justify the effort expended:
“A university teacher (PhD) earns less than a middle manager, especially in the regions. Therefore, often being in graduate school has nothing to do with motivation to defend a dissertation. The pedagogical component in graduate school, of course, also seems to me to be an unnecessary element, all this need to be distracted from your research by assignments and tests,” says Dr. philological sciences, Head of the Department of Journalism at Yaroslav the Wise Novgorod State University Tatyana Kaminskaya.
In her opinion, the three-stage education system (bachelor’s, master’s and postgraduate studies) did not justify itself, since all three stages have little connection with each other:
“I had several graduate students who, having written one chapter and one article for the VAK journal (Higher Attestation Commission - approx. VIEW), at this stage quit the race, realizing that these efforts of one year are only a quarter of what is required . And no one guarantees them advancement at the university or employment at all.
As a result, at our university middle age 40 years is a very good indicator, and for many departments it is unattainable. Those who remain are either science fanatics, or those who managed to defend themselves back in Soviet times or the 90s, when there was no such formalism and red tape.”
The "Golden Age" of Soviet graduate school
Postgraduate studies as a form of training highly qualified specialists arose in the RSFSR in 1925, and in the 1930s it spread to universities and research institutes of the USSR, when the country was building a new system for training scientific and teaching staff. Graduate school accepted specialists with higher education who had worked in their specialty for at least two years. The age of applicants was at least 35 years, and the state gave two to three years to write and defend a scientific work. During this time, the graduate student received a decent stipend, comparable to salaries in large industry.
IN post-war period Soviet power proclaimed the training of scientific personnel a fundamental principle of the state. Until the 60s, resolutions were adopted to improve the training and certification of specialists, standards were raised dissertations, stimulating institutes and universities for the training of highly qualified personnel. All this contributed to the fact that since the 60s, postgraduate education in the USSR has been on the rise: in 1968, over 96 thousand people were studying in graduate school.
However, after the collapse Soviet Union prestige scientific degree fell sharply, it ceased to be a sign of elitism. Postgraduate students and doctors could work for an idea and with a ghostly prospect of salary, remaining in universities and research institutes, leaving for more profitable areas or going abroad. In the end
period from 1995 to 2012 in the scientific community it is called the “graduate bubble” - and is considered an outright failure in the university postgraduate system.
The high requirements for a candidate for an academic degree remained virtually at the same level. However, time, sufficient financial support from the state, individual assistance from the scientific community is often not enough.
Graduate students from former Soviet republics, since there is often a lack of their own scientific base, the percentage of those who defended their dissertation there is even lower. For example, in Belarus in 2014, out of 1,148 graduate students, only 67 successfully defended their defense.
Experts from the Ministry of Education and Science have been talking about the need for reforms in this area for a long time: the head of the department, Olga Vasilyeva, that the Ministry of Education and Science proposes to return the mandatory defense of dissertations for graduate students, is discussing the possibility of increasing the duration of graduate school from three to five years and dividing it into two stages.
“There are several different scenarios. The scientific community and the university and professional community must choose the most adequate and most modern model postgraduate studies. It can be two-level or two-stage,” says Deputy Head of the Ministry of Education and Science Grigory Trubnikov.
He explained that when such a scenario is implemented, the first stage, which will last two to three years, involves three traditional exams: a specialty, a foreign language and, possibly, philosophy, as well as a qualifying exam based on the results of training. “And this graduate school is entirely financed from the budget, that is, it budget places", noted Trubnikov.
The second stage, he said, will also last two or three years and will be a specialization in a specific field of science in which graduate students are going to defend their PhD work. In this case, a graduate student can receive a scholarship both from budget funds and through the grant system.
“I completely agree with Trubnikov. State postgraduate studies must necessarily end with a candidate's dissertation.
Now the percentage of protection is extremely small. The state spends huge amounts of money on training highly qualified personnel, but the protection of a graduate student depends only on strong-willed qualities his supervisor, the diligence and intelligence of the graduate student himself,”
– Vice-Rector for Scientific Work of the Far Eastern University told the newspaper VZGLYAD federal university, Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor Kirill Golokhvast.
According to the deputy minister, the reform assumes that upon completion of the first level of postgraduate study, a young scientist will be required to defend qualifying work, which will be a kind of analogue of a PhD degree in foreign universities (PhD is an analogue Russian candidate Sciences, an academic degree awarded by universities in most countries - approx. SIGHT).
Trubnikov proposes to discuss the mutual recognition of a qualifying diploma, which would be similar to a foreign PhD diploma. Professor Kirill Golokhvast emphasized that a Russian candidate of science degree is automatically recognized throughout the world by the scientific community.
The crisis post-perestroika period in the Russian scientific community is being overcome step by step, but it is far from a second “golden age,” experts say. However, the state is no longer ready to let the postgraduate education system take its course and, along with rights, gives graduate students more responsibilities. Leaving high standards quality dissertation research, The Ministry of Education and Science may, as part of the reform, remove bureaucratic and teaching responsibilities from graduate students. Increased scholarships and grants will allow graduate students to think less about their personal budget. In this way, time will be freed up for writing a scientific work, and a young scientist, if he really intends to engage in science and not procrastinate, will no longer have objective reasons not to defend his dissertation.
