Happiness and misfortune

There would be no happiness, but misfortune helped ” - so very often the exam school teachers regard the exam. Our education system has not seen happiness for so long that I forgot to think about it: it remains only to rely on the fact that some new initiative of officials from education suddenly turned out to be a“ step forward. ”And it will happen, suddenly and it will turn out. These very“ steps ”(more precise USE) And the article by Tamara Eidelman is devoted (" The process cannot be stopped ").

Eidelman's reasoning is interesting, first of all, the uselessness of their goal -setting. There is no need to defend a single state exam. In our educational environment, any polemic still begins and ends with the description of several simple technical techniques to which officials are not doing. And therefore, officials do something of their own, only one understandable to them, and teachers continue to talk about something of their own, understandable only to them. " Written exams are easier to take than oral ." Similar conclusions (as, indeed, completely opposite), I had heard long before the exam. I don’t know, the chicken was before eggs or an egg before chicken, but in today's school it is equally difficult to pass any exam, regardless of the degree of its verbality.
So opponents in this case are not just similar: they are flesh from each other's flesh. Together they make up that vicious environment in which you can say and think anything, but there is no sense from this. Full vacuum. The sound goes out not even on the second or third link of the program, but immediately. Any word dies, not yet born. You can argue about the exam for a long time, but it is impossible to cancel it. Not because he is good or bad, but because the opinion of the "pedagogical community" is not interesting even to this "public" itself, not to mention society as a whole.

And the surprise with which Tamara Eidelman speaks of bribery in universities (“ But the approach itself is interesting - I heard such discussions many times, and, of course, no one ever said that it was ashamed to pay a bribe ”), it looks more than strange. Of course, it is not a shame to pay bribes, because teachers and university teachers, who for fifteen years allowed to wipe their legs about themselves, do not deserve anything but bribes. If the salary of a novice teacher in the province ranges between one and a half and two thousand rubles, then what can be required of them and how to relate to them?

And the teachers continue to argue with each other about their own, about the exam:

" When they begin to say that the student, you see, may guess what answer is correct, for some reason no one specifies that such simple tests testing knowledge of elementary facts belong to Parts A -that is, to that component of the exam, having made only three. In parts B and C, it is necessary to establish causal relationships, the logic of events, extract information from the source, determine the views of the author of the source. In my opinion, it was finally that the exam began to test such skills.

We will evaluate the slight crawling of the respected Tamara Eidelman. “The exam began to test the skills” ... or maybe it is worth saying that if before the teacher - the report for the sake of (Rono doesn’t doze!) - simply and without any methodological sophistications “trained” indifferent students to an oral exam, now they are trained in exactly the same way? After the official beginning of the national project "Education" to the teachers - and they themselves, not very embarrassed, say this - they will have to invent "innovations", but, I believe, there will be no problems with this. As innovations, a little corrected manual of the 80s has long been good.

Children, however, do not care what and how they are taught. Remaining in the spirit (with all these vulgar "evenings", "line" and "holidays") Soviet, today's school exists only because it is almost impossible to expel even the most notorious Devomber and an idiot. I don’t know where Tamara Eidelman saw the desire to “put the mark worse”:

" What kind of country is it for us if we all only think about how to put the child worse? If the examination evaluation diverges from the annual, the instruction orders the highest - is this bad? Mom and dad, why don't you like it? "

At school, everyone is pulled, pulled from the last forces, meaningless and mercilessly. Why just, it’s not very clear. At the exit, we get a crowd who are not able and who do not want to be able to be able to syncolize anything to sit down pants at the university, so that later with a diploma of the "tourism manager" it is convulsive to look for the place of the waiter. And they are partly torn because higher education by the “pedagogical community” by the “pedagogical community” is reduced almost to the level of the average special. And the exam has nothing to do with it. The fact is that the eternal craving of educational officials for the correct reporting is bizarrely combined with the unwillingness of teachers at least once in their lives, at least to go in something, as they say, “to the principle” and explain to high school students one simple, in essence, thing. Namely, “managers”, “economists”, “lawyers” ETC are so much that it is better to finish an ordinary vocational school and become a crane operator or sling, or even a seamstress or a cook. But where is there! Teachers are not so much taught as they play their own (very old) complexes on children: let them, they say, “everything will work out”. Nothing will work. Neither with the exam, nor without the exam.

" Why are such efforts of a huge number of people aimed not to let young people get a higher education? Is it better to try to make so that as many people can learn in universities? Why should you cut off? " These monstrous questions are the basis of the university education system, after which each self -respecting enterprise cannot but retrain the “specialists” who come to work. "More people" is already studying at universities, but for some reason the result is more and more sad.

“ So, those who are eager to enter, and do not buy a diploma in the subway still want to learn something ,” the teacher insists. And the keyword here, of course, is "something." All according to Pushkin, from whom "we all studied a little of something and somehow." Indeed, what's the difference, what to study at the institute, if you still do not have to work in the specialty?

The conclusion that Tamara Eidelman makes is harsh and disappointing. But in moderation naive, like the whole article of the teacher:

" And if, due to the introduction of the exam, how they predict, university teachers will scatter, for whom tutoring is an help to the salary, what can be said to be said? Rural teachers receive about 2 thousand rubles, and nothing, they scatter ... "

Do not scatter, of course. If the number of first -graders will be reduced at the same rapid pace, it will be possible to not run away anywhere. And slowly but surely retraining into managers ...

I hasten readers to please: they will still scatter without any exam. Or rather, they simply will not come. Does Tamara Eidelman know what percentage of graduates of pedagogical specialties goes to school? If five out of sixty people, then this can be read for great luck. But why in such a catastrophic situation, when the average age of a school teacher is almost forty years old, it is not very clear to talk about the advantages and disadvantages of the exam.

The exam is, of course, misfortune. But he - with the usual deficiency of happiness - will not help our education. It seems that the patient, so that he does not suffer in agony, just more prudent and merciful to shoot. And start everything with a clean sheet. The faded school notebooks are too painted with all sorts of nobility ...