The regime of forced self -isolation caused a wave of opinions that very soon the professor in the audiences would not be needed, and even the textbooks will sink into oblivion. Many enthusiasts of the entire distance believe that the new term, formulated by the Foreign Word EdTech, will squeeze out the classical education, and the most radical ones will completely destroy it. In fact, educational technologies are hidden behind this concept (so this is translated into Russian), based on the development of network platforms and methods.

Online is not a new method, but only a delivery method

Actively expressing such opinions remind me of the television operator Rudolph from the movie "Moscow does not believe tears." However, he turned out to be Rodion Petrovich, when the Russian names came into fashion. Let me remind you that the Rudolf-Rodion stood, one might say, at the source and with an interval of 20 years, broadcast about the same mantra: “Television belongs to the future. There will be no newspapers, no books, no cinema, no theaters, but there will be one continuous television. ”

By a slightly exaggerated analogy: there will be neither textbooks, no audiences, nor professors in them, only online, and nothing “lamp” - only “digital”.

And here the substitution of concepts is obvious. It is somehow forgotten that online is only the technology for transmitting certain information that does not define its quality.

And the quality is determined by the level of knowledge of the teacher, his understanding of the needs of the audience and the market, and simply by the ability to formalize all this in a course of lectures or practical classes. And it doesn’t matter where the lesson is in the audience or on the computer screen.

Correspondence is more difficult than full -time

Personal experience shows that in online it is much more difficult to teach, like students, to perceive something. I do not want to talk about the mutual benefits of living communication, as well as that no one has yet canceled charisma. In any case, no one argues that the sensations from the performances in the hall and through the monitor screen are fundamentally different. But as soon as the champions of the entire digital pass from the theater to education, the thesis is all and everything online, it immediately gains relevance.

If you exaggerate a little, then the advantages of “digital education” look like this: the program can be downloaded, listened to high -quality lectures, perform and send test tasks, and then get feedback. And why walk somewhere?

Correct the program

My 15-year teaching experience, the result of which was the launch of regular economic disciplines at a purely humanitarian journalism, shows that there are no two identical groups. And each time on the basis of testing, the general level of understanding, logical thinking and not one factor is determined. And each time it is necessary to adjust the teaching methodology a little (and sometimes strongly). And inside the group there is almost always a different level of students - this must be taken into account. The highest praise for me, as a teacher, was the recognition of one graduate - an absolute humanitarium, accidentally hit our module: I began to look differently at the economy and what you were talking about, became for me the basis for building another logic.

Why are we teaching, and they learn

And here the main question arises: what is the ultimate goal of the “professor that goes into the misery”? Give a set of knowledge that can be memorized, master and fixed with standard examples - or give the ability to think, build logical chains using basic knowledge, while reaching a high level of understanding?

A successful example of the implementation of the first path is tutoring. To drag on a solution and put the necessary set of skills is a difficult task, but solved. And as the experience of preparing for the exam shown, this does not need a “tube professor”.

It is no secret for university teachers for a long time that now the most fashionable and probably effective (especially in terms of price-result) “Professor” in this area are students of the younger courses who successfully surrender the exam. Ads: I myself handed over 100 points, I will prepare you - these are the realities of today. Only to real knowledge, education and educational process has nothing to do with it.

To go the second way - to try not just to give a set of knowledge and even skills, but to develop logical thinking, which is largely lost during the preparation of the Unified State Examination, to teach the faithful use of the acquired in the practical sphere, the ability to transform knowledge and generalize is much more difficult. And here you can’t do the standard “number”.

The textbook will survive if it is good

Approximately, too, we can say about textbooks. Again, I will give an example from my own practice. Almost 10 years ago, my colleagues and I made the first full -fledged textbook on economics for humanities. Those who then successfully worked in Vedomosti studied it, and today in VTIMES, and also in Kommersant, Forbes, Russian and Western agencies, and in many places in Russia and abroad. But in the economy, examples and realities become obsolete quickly enough, the legislative base is changing. Several attempts to rewrite it ended in the fact that in the process of preparation the examples became obsolete again.

But in general, the textbook remains quite a worker - combined with fresh presentations and examples. He shows basic things and gives a certain level of understanding and generalization. Why replace it purely relevant, sending it to a landfill?

And he lives exclusively in electronic form only among students of a professional module and does not enter into any contradiction with digital innovations, and even quite the opposite.

Real knowledge does not age

In general, the problem of obsolete knowledge and their carriers seems somewhat far -fetched. I will give such an example. Explaining the basic principles of accounting to my students, I more than once quote the book of his founding father of Italian mathematician Luke Pacholly. This fundamental work was written in 1484, but more precisely, despite the complex language of that time, it is unlikely that something can popularly explain the nature of accounting and its deep essence.

At the same time, you can’t learn to work in the 1C-Buccal Gallery program. However, the real accountants (almost 10-year-old “Glavbukhovsky” from the Soviet era allows the experience to make such a generalization) who understand the nature of those taking into account them, is becoming less and less. Introduction to the primary document and automatic reporting formation, bypassing intermediate and key transformations, significantly saves time and expenses (and this is good), but higher education is not necessary for such work - there are enough seminars, video courses and specific literature for this.

And for numerous conversations about the “digitalization” of education, I'm afraid, its essence and tasks are missed. And no matter how much the following problems of Russian higher education have aggravated this way, turning universities into online lampstrument courses.

Why do not turn universities into online courses