Lies in fulfillment of the order. Part 2

In Part 1 (TRV-HOW, No. 134, 07/30/2013), in connection with “a number of measures to increase wages” at Moscow State University, issues were discussed relatively simple-“organizational”. In the presence of common sense, they are somehow clarified on the basis of regulatory documents, in extreme cases - with the help of lawyers. And in part 2, you will have to discuss issues that do not always have unambiguous answers. In short, this is a block of questions "Who, whom and what teaches at Moscow State University?"

Our rector comes up with the ratings - such that they confirmed as if “MSU is preparing an elite, high -class specialists with a good fundamental education” ( www.rg.ru/2012/07/10/sadovnichiy.html ). I do not claim that the rector says to the lie , but we need to clarify which part of the students we manage to turn into the specified "elite". At least at the large natural scientific faculties, we are busy quite massive, and by no means elite education. And we all participate in a variety of lies, supporting the image of the "Chief University of the country" in isolation from its realities .

I know little about the humanitarian part of Moscow State University, this is a separate world that grows with incredible speed. I know about different natural faculties and institutions of Moscow State University to varying degrees. However, we are all in one of the heightly tilted boat, and I will be grateful to colleagues from any faculties of Moscow State University for continuing the topic, regardless of their consent or disagreement with the below.

Immediately and categorically I do not accept the accusations of the ending of a litter from a hut, now called a "violation of corporate ethics." There are many wonderful scientific people and traditions at Moscow State University. And in order to save all this, it is necessary, to finally stop lying to yourself and others . There are no more “internal problems of Moscow State University”, there is a general problem of preserving higher education in the country , which, against the background of national madness, requires the active intervention of “ordinary” universities. Not rallies, not creating "societies", but simply professional actions.

Multilayer lies are contained in the subject of the special pride of our rector - in relation to 1: 4 (number of employees: number of students), both in the numerator and the denominator. Although I fully admit that when you look from above from the HZ representatives of the administrative vertical, this very 1: 4 seems reliable. Much depends on the angle.

Ping Pong along the vertical

At Moscow State University there is a vertical with a complex hierarchy, which is convenient for answers to the questions of workers - faculty administrators explain different troubles with the need to follow the instructions of the rector, and the rector indicates that all problems arise at the faculties, they say, "take a sort out of your own there." A ball to the left is a ball right ... It is pointless to delve into this ping-pong-you can solve production issues only without looking at the vertical rising in a parallel world. They have a rating there, a satellite, the scope of construction on the opposite side of Lomonosovsky Prospekt, a meeting with the Patriarch and with the Grand Dama from the State Duma, the International Olympiads with a whistle and so on. And we have outlets in the audiences from the walls and the mellar do not leave traces on the board - well, we won’t buy chalk? - Even if reagents and consumables, despite all their tenders, manage to buy? - And let them start a satellite ...

So it has been for years. But now a qualitatively different situation. The local vertical so reverently clung to the state vertical that the whole structure can finally collapse. In the case of a reduction in state in an inadequate mechanism, we are not only the “elites” - and the educational program - we will not be able to provide. And on top again, the ball to the left is the ball right. Here, for example, vice -rector V.E. Podolsky, being on vacation, kindly answered some of my questions: “By what criteria is it supposed to choose“ candidates for reduction ”?” And "who and when will determine the compliance with these criteria?" It turned out that the rector provides faculties with the opportunity to independently decide the fate of the scientific state. This, however, involves some kind of “order” according to the units ... It would be interesting to look at it, in particular, at “quotas” for the institutions of Moscow State University, in which the state is only scientific, although without them the numerator in the notorious attitude of 1: 4 will suffer greatly.

1: 4 in the "Main University of the country" - numerator

Regularly sent somewhere up the reports of the number of hours for each teacher of Moscow State University is a two-layer lies , and again from the “production necessity”. In the first layer there is an easily observed fact: part of the auditor's watch is practiced by the scientific state, and not at all pedagogical . At different faculties and departments - to varying degrees, because historically there has been a staffing with completely different proportions. In the second layer - and this is much more difficult to observe - the participation of a scientific state in extracurricular pedagogical work : in the preparation and testing of tasks, in support and updating workshops, in reception of exams and, most importantly, in the leadership of course, diploma and graduate work. “Watch” for some of these types of activities “write out”, but very funny (for example, “from 1 to 3 hours for the leadership of course work”). The calculation of the clock in this scale due to the formation of the staffing table is a cynical lies.

According to our experience, at the chemical faculty and the Faculty of Sciences about the materials of extracurricular time, the audit time exceeds the auditornium by an order of magnitude- unless, of course, the task is set to teach students to be something . The verb “teach”, according to the dictionary, it has values ​​(1) to report, transmit knowledge on a specific subject, teach something and (2) to work in an educational institution. In connection with the achievement of the subject of training, of course, we would be of interest to the value (1), regardless of labor costs. In fact, this result does not work without the participation of the scientific state.

Of course, not every representative of the scientific state is in demand in the pedagogical process - but not every representative of the PPS is training without looking at the “clock”. Therefore, the reduction of state in Moscow State University cannot affect only scientists . It should contribute to the fact that students are taught by people engaged in modern science, without dividing into pure and unclean with different “indicators in effective contracts”. Exceptions for general educational disciplines (primarily mathematics), of course, are possible, but there can be no exceptions in the profile part of the formation of exceptions.

The attitude of 1: 4 certainly contains lies in the numerator - not all employees teach students or can teach them in principle.

1: 4 in the "Main University of the country" - denominator

Handing their hands and raising their eyes to the ceiling, teachers tell each other terrible stories such as "imagine, and he answers me that there are 10 milliliters in a liter." Members of Hakov, crawling out of the audience after meetings, are spitting out and muttering: "These are not diplomas, but very medium term papers." And this is not at all senile grumbling. The competition for some natural faculties is purely symbolic, the level at the entrance is really very low, the curriculum is not adjusted for this.

We do not have “material for preparing the elite” now, and the very word “elite” excludes mass. On the general stream, motivated students can now still be given a strong craft. For example, at the chemical faculty, this is organic synthesis, analytical chemistry, radiophase analysis - widely popular crafts of modern science and production, the possession of which, however, does not yet turn a person into a researcher. I am absolutely not sorry for the efforts to train personnel for companies and industry. But without motivation (and it is not, for example, more than half of the general flow that I have to train), no efforts can be prepared by a competent specialist. Yes, motivation for money became impossible-this is called "the loss of prestige of natural science specialties." And people with the motivation of a different nature (simply with the need to work their heads) have always been few. Both that and the other are invincible experimental facts. To preserve at least some scientific potential, we need to orient the entire learning system, first of all, on the minority not concerned with a straightforwardly understood “prestige”, for future researchers. In my opinion, we cope with this much worse than with routine learning craft.

Researchers need to prepare a piece, for more than one year, in strong scientific groups , with a good publication based on the results of the diploma. And these groups should not be on their own, but in a healthy scientific environment - with substantive seminars, with external reviewers, with regular lectures of foreign colleagues. There are still examples at Moscow State University, but this is a drop in the sea in comparison with the scale of general flows. A few strong students often do not even have time to find such groups before leaving for foreign graduate school. All that before the departure can give them Moscow State University is some support for self -education (which is also not so few).

In general, we, of course, are obliged to teach everyone who was recruited at Moscow State University . And if possible, do not wring hands from the fact that in the 4th year students are regularly found who do not know what logarithm is. That is, they may know the definition - but when solving problems they write log2 + log3 = log5. Motivated, as soon as you explain to them humanly (without doubles and swearing) where they are-they rest on a horn and learn something in the end. And who, after the end, plan to trade in toothpaste or smile to visitors in travel agency - those horror of their own situation do not understand. Deduct in packs? - No, just not to portray an elite educational institution, but to relentlessly engage in laborious selection and adjustment of the curriculum. Our vertical did not leave other solutions to us.

It would be correct to sharply reduce the reception and provide a real competition (I understand that such a decision by the leadership of Moscow State University will never be made). The transition to a two -level system would help: the remaining in the magistrait would definitely be taught more efficiently. But even such an obvious decision by the leadership of Moscow State University has already been rejected - moreover, a six -year specialty has been recorded, which increases the number of “watches”. So, we can only concentrate efforts on creating and maintaining special groups and small faculties in order to give the opportunity to study more uniform and motivated students in a more homogeneous environment.

Well, what is 1: 4 in the end? The numerator is clearly less than 1, the denominator is much less than 4 - if we keep in mind the result, and not the process itself. And now about the "process itself."

What does the numerator teach the denominator?

My mother graduated from Khimfak in 1948, I myself - in 1981, my son - in 2006. And we all studied according to a structurally unchanged curriculum, although with all sorts of nuances. Over the years, the structure of science has changed significantly, which in foreign universities has led to a change in the structure of chemical education. And on our island of stability, update (mainly special courses) rather resemble patches on an old, once very elegant and functional, but already pretty shabby jacket.

I'm not at all to throw a jacket. It must be carefully redrawn - that is, engage in the coordination of all old and new courses among themselves. Formally, the method committee is engaged in this. I’m coming from time to time, and show - documented - that the program of my common course in the 7th semester is overlapping with the programs of two previous general courses. And further with specific examples (scans from student solutions of problems)- which leads to a piece of exposition in non-core courses. I propose changes-they suspect some catch, although I don’t ask for extra hours and even ready to give them ... But all years sinking in approvals, and this is much easier than the coordination of general courses with special courses.

This year, in the spring, the vertical ordered to write the programs of the “six -year specialty” regarding specialization, not reporting a word about the fate of curriculum in junior courses. That is, for the mentioned jacket, we had to sew sleeves, collar and pockets, and for what to attach them to-someone will decide later. It was only indicated that the packing should include “place of discipline in the structure of the OOP”, “list of competencies”, etc. The format of the required programs was finally reported a week after the initial Deadline. Then they ordered all the same to write in English, but this Deadline was tolerated several times, while, it seems, he drowned in the vacation season.

In parallel, the innovation was still started - “Interfaculty courses”, according to the order of Rector No. 43 of 02/13/2013. We ordered courses from 24 to 30 academic hours, with such a condition (quote from the mailing list at the faculty, the order was not shown):

As part of the usual curriculum, we have not learned to coordinate anything like that, but here in 30 hours it is necessary that, regardless of specialization and age, everything understood everything. As in the famous "nanoabuka" - for everyone, from ministers to housewives. That is, they also want such a new lies from us, there is little old.

The first victims are "half -timbers"

I repeat that special groups are the only thing we can do now efficiently. For them, programs are easier to coordinate, since the number of participants is less. And it is already clear that practically no such serious program can be provided only by employees of Moscow State University - invited lecturers, and sometimes “seminarians” are needed. They are difficult, but manage to find in the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Previously, they were issued for half a time - unfortunately, not only them, but also of different wedding generals, which, perhaps, the administration may have developed an idea of ​​part -time as a ballast. In the light of the upcoming abbreviation, this ballast seemed apparently a good reserve.

In a letter from the training unit ( Date: Wed, 5 Jun 201313: 43: 06 ) we were informed that “for the timely holding of complicated complicants for the 2013/2014 school, the Moscow State University Chemical Faculty must be provided until 12:00 on June 6, 2013 to the training department of combined facilities from among the professorship staff, the educational department, planned for work in the next academic year, in the form specified in the appendix. " That is, they gave it to the performance of 22 hours 17 minutes. An order of 05/28/2013 was attached to the letter, in which it was proposed to do the same until 05/31/2013. That is, in three days, but 5 days before the mailing. To arrange the papers strictly to Deadline, which has already passed, we somehow can. By the way, read what is further in the order, and do not say that the faculty is to blame for everything (the ball to the left is the ball right ...): until July 15 (45 days), the fate of our half -runs will decide some management, and then until September 15 (60 days), an order will be prepared, which will then chew on another management.

Management - growths vertically in its rector. And with these growths, the issue of enrolling part -time workers will be finally resolved after the start of the school year, it is good, if in September - it is called “timely conduct”. I consider it simply indecent to contact colleagues from RAS with requests for participation in our educational process under such conditions.

The passage about "leading scientists" is touching. Doctors can be invited, but there are no candidates ... But you can academicians. Probably in nature there are academicians who are ready to read the course for half -time, but I did not meet such. But I know very capable and relatively young people outside the Moscow State University, ready to work in a team and mess with students seriously. And again we will lie, formalizing their work in some indirect way.

Sad forecasts

Among us there are rumors that the rector in the sweat of the face is producing money to increase the scientific state in order to avoid reduction. You can throw rotten tomatoes at me, but I think that if you get, then we have no chance of changing at all. If it does not get, then it is easy to foresee two very bad scenarios in which “attracted money” or “formal indicators” (publication ratings) become criteria.

Both of these scenarios are quite easy to perform, and both will lead to losses of employees really important for the university.

I do not discuss the first script due to its primitive savagery. The second was carefully equipped in advance - we were all put on the counter in the “Truth” system ( http://istina.msu.ru .) The message is like correct - let the publications of all employees be visible on the website of the Moscow State University. And the technical implementation is not bad, developers from the Research Institute of Mechanics created a number of quite reasonable tools. But the purpose of the idea with an automatic quotation on Web of Science (WOS) and Scopus in the absence of a detailed classification of scientific topics seems to be purely bureaucratic, since the price of these tsifs for everyone is completely different - not only within each field of knowledge, but even inside narrow sections. Only other specialists of the same profile can judge whether a great or little quoting of a specialist.

In addition, "truth" often lies in the most frank way. It gives out some tops for WOS data that is easy to pull out by pressing the button, especially in the presence of MyResearcherld. And completely ignores the existence of a large layer of references to the newspaper in the same WOS of this base. Для многих математиков, ботаников, геологов это может приводить к занижению цитирования их работ в разы. Для сотрудников старших поколений такое же занижение возникает иногда и в других науках, подробнее см. в статье «Библиометрический азарт как следствие отсутствия научной экспертизы» ( www.expertcorps.ru/static/cms/Bibliometric_excitement.pdf ). В таблице для некоторых сотрудников разных факультетов МГУ приведены примеры вранья, они находятся моментально. При проведении аттестаций «Истина» бодро распечатывает каждому бумажку с цифрами, которые насчитал автомат, а остальное, конечно, можно приписать в каком-нибудь представлении… Но кто ж поверит на фоне «Истины»… а разбираться лень или некогда.

«Истину» надо бы переименовать… пора уже… А то перед людьми неловко.

Выборочное сопоставление данных в системе «Истина» (http://istina. msu.ru) с данными Web of Science (WoS), извлеченными по опции Cited Reference Search www.expertcorps.ru/science/whoiswho (M_all — общее число упоминаний работ автора в WoS, M_ref — число работ автора, реферируемых WoS).

«Автоматика «Истины» умеет считать цитирование только M_ref работ, что приводит к существенно разной недооценке цитирования в разных разделах наук и для людей разных поколений. M_all может быть выше общего числа статей, опубликованных данным автором, поскольку включает ссылки на учебники, монографии, монографические главы и т.п

И что же со всем этим делать?

Опишу схематически сценарий сокращения штатов в МГУ, который позволил бы начать решать накопившиеся в нашем заведении проблемы. Этот сценарий трудоемок, поскольку основан на внешней экспертной оценке научных тематик и учебных планов, но мне он представляется единственно возможным для сохранения университета.

1. Администрация университета не должна иметь никакого отношения к назначению экспертов . Не потому, что среди наших администраторов нет грамотных специалистов (безусловно есть, хотя есть и другие). А потому, что в классическом жанре peer-review иначе просто неприлично. Координаторами этого процесса могут выступить уважаемые люди из других вузов и из институтов РАН, не имеющие к МГУ никакого отношения — Fellows международных обществ, редакторы международных журналов и т.п. Их труд должен быть достойно оплачен. Опыт работы внешних координаторов в МГУ есть уже года два — но до сих пор это касалось только некоторых внутренних конкурсов.

2. Каждый реальный научный коллектив (лаборатория, группа, включающие как ППС , так и научный штат) должен сформулировать свою тематику за последние 3-5 лет и план на такой же будущий период. К этому тексту приложить репрезентативные статьи по выбору авторов, список участников коллектива (включая «инструменталистов», часто не имеющих собственной тематики), информацию об участии в преподавании, о дипломах и диссертациях последних лет, а также данные о цитировании.

3. Минимум 3 внешних эксперта, назначенных внешним координатором , должны оценить актуальность или тупиковость каждой тематики, уместность подготовки по ней специалистов, перспективы их трудоустройства в России и продолжения обучения за рубежом. На основании этих оценок нужно выделить коллективы, которые нужно сохранить любой ценой, а также другие категории коллективов.

4. Сотрудники, не входящие в научные коллективы (занятые только преподаванием), должны представить для аналогичной экспертной оценки развернутые программы своих дисциплин , включая предлагаемые студентам задачи , и краткие сведения о том, с какими иными дисциплинами сопряжена их педагогическая деятельность.

5. Внешним экспертам, имеющим опыт преподавания , нужно предоставить указанные в п.4 материалы вместе с учебными планами и получить их рекомендации об актуальности этих планов и необходимости их модификации с участием работающих в МГУ или приглашенных преподавателей.

В этой схеме не может быть никаких «квот» для подразделений. Эта схема может быть реализована только при активной поддержке ее основного принципа значительным числом рядовых сотрудников МГУ и детализирована с их участием — вопреки зашатавшейся вертикали, растерянность которой вполне очевидна.

Посмотрите на РАН: оголтелое законотворчество конца июня 2013 года всего за один последующий месяц привело к невиданному до сих пор взаимодействию сотрудников совершенно разных институтов, к появлению содержательных проектов документов, то есть к реальной самоорганизации и попыткам «самореформирования». Коллегам из РАН в чем-то проще — там в этом процессе практически на равных с «рядовыми» участвуют и директора институтов, и маститые носители званий. А вот от ректоратов крупнейших вузов пока ничего кроме «взятия под козырек» по поводу поручения и постановлений не слышно. Ну, значит надо попытаться обойтись без них…