How does the standard for literature work? Disgusting, but very easy for inspectors

What to teach children at school determine the Federal State Educational Standard - federal state educational standards. Their new version has just appeared - in this July.

The previous version of the Federal State Educational Standard did not contain a specific list of works for literature lessons, but only presented the general requirements for the education of a qualified reader. In the summer of 2017, a single list was included in the standard with the consolidation of works by year.

The content was specified in the approximate general educational program (SOP), which allowed a little variability. It was convenient for creators of work programs - authors of textbooks, teachers who prefer not to take other people's programs, but to develop their own. But it is inconvenient for the inspectors: it turned out that in literature it is almost impossible to create control and measuring materials for verification work and state exams based on texts that all schoolchildren are guaranteed to read. So, under the conversation that variability destroys the unified educational space of the country, the Ministry of Industry was set to the Ministry of Association: to clarify the content of federal standards. Since the end of 2016, a working group under the leadership of N. Solzhenitsyna has been engaged in this.

In the summer of 2017, suddenly - unexpectedly even for members of the working group - a new project of the Federal State Educational Standard was published, which caused the general outrage of school verbals and academic philologists (in detail here and here ). Particular indignation was caused by the fact that a single list of literature was included in the standard with the consolidation of works by year, and this generally deprived teachers of all the rights to retreat at least half a step aside, at least somehow take into account the features of a particular class.

The discussion of the standard went on for several years, and as a result, a compromise mandatory list was included in the text of the standard without binding by year. And in the approximate work program , on which schools can (and undoubtedly will) be relying - almost unchanged the same single list of the 2017 model with a clear distribution of classes. But even this conservative, cautious document has already managed to cause the indignation of the statesmen: after all, it includes several texts of modern children's writers. What if they have inappropriate political views?

About the standard for literature - Anton Skulachev, chairman of the Guild of Wanderers.

"No one will read anything except short content."

Anton Skulachev

Chairman of the Guild of Verbators:

The Federal State Educational Standard, adopted and approved now, is rather a compromise. However, in addition to a number of grammatical and speech errors, it also contains amazing formulations: for example,

In the section of the Standard on History, the concept of “complex nineties” is found - that is, an appraisal epithet is included in the normative document!

As for the literature program, the approved standard is also a compromise option compared to the reinforced concrete standard of 2018, prepared in the Ministry of Training under the leadership of Olga Vasilyeva. The list of literature in the new standard turned out to be comical rather: it is clear that the compilers were guided by the Korovins textbook - for example, it was from there that Shukshin’s story “Stenka Razin”, which became mandatory for study. But the Ministry of Education has been offered more than once: let's not call specific works in the standard, let's only call the names of the authors.

As a result, an attempt to fix the content of education as the Ministry of Council understood this: the list, in which, along with A. S. Pushkin, Yu. P. Kuznetsov, a list where there is not a single modern name, where Chekhov can choose one story, and now, on the basis of these lists, you can legitimate compilation of the AGE and the Unified State Exam.

I can’t help but say that there are progressive points in the standard. For example, the Federal State Educational Standard of the Personal Results, associated with emotional intelligence, including "realize the inability to control everything around." It seems to me that it will be wonderful if the experts of the Ministry of Education learn this.

The preamble included formulations about variability, about the value of the student’s individuality, it clearly says that the school can independently develop its educational program based on the Federal State Educational Standard.

But the main drama does not unfold on the FSO field, but on the field of an approximate program.

On July 10, amendments were made to the Law on Education, which states that the school may not use its program, but an approximate working program - this is a new concept in the law. Of course, the approximate work programs on which the school can rely on this moment have already been developed. Clause 7 of Article 12 of the Law on Education says that educational organizations are developing their programs based on the Federal State Educational Standard. Now the school can take as a basis an approximate program.

“The approximate work program of the basic general secondary education in literature”, developed by the Institute for the Development Strategy of the Education of RAO, is, in fact, there is a “Vasilievsky” Federal State Educational Standard of the 2018 Sample, only worse. The texts are tightly attached to classes and calendar planning inside the year, and the program itself relies on a massive, but completely outdated textbook, even according to moderately-minded teachers: be kind in the 5th grade to give children “Mumu”, in the 7th-“Tarasa Bulba” ...

There are a lot of texts - more than you can read meaningfully, and basically it is the XIX century: peasant children, realities unfamiliar to modern schoolchildren.

In poetry - only “Theme of Nature” and “Theme of the Homeland”. Well, back in the 7th grade, Pushkin is given “October 19”-when children still do not have a biographical context, when they do not know anything about the poet’s lyceum friends, and a poem for three quarters of this biographical context consists.

All works in the approximate program are strictly distributed over the years of study, but it is not clear why Taras Bulba is studied in the seventh grade, and the “captain’s daughter” is in the eighth: after all, “Taras Bulba” is more difficult to arrange the text, inwardly contradictory, while there are certain age -related restrictions, completely terrible scenes.

The content of training in the approximate work program is distributed not only by years, but also by the clock. At the same time, for a serious and deep text (say, on the “snow queen” Andersen) can be allotted for only two hours. What thoughtful conversation, what kind of familiarization to reading can we talk about?

If it was just a “approximate work program”, which the school can use, or may not use it, it would be hollowing. But recently, the regional ministries of the Education received a letter signed by Evgeny Semchenko, the head of the Department of State Policy and the General Education of the Ministry of Council, in which they are invited to begin the use of an exemplary work program and inform the list of organizations that will begin this use in the testing regimen from September 1. It is very likely that the local officials may rush to fulfill the requirement to introduce the work program and instead of the right to use it, such an obligation will appear with schools.

The list of literature in the work program returns us to the most mass textbook of Korovins with the minimum content of modern literature (for two hours it is assigned to Zhevalevsky and Pasternak Plus Dashevskaya), in which the texts are a huge number, and often they do not correspond to age. Say, there are four lyrical texts for one lesson (at the same time, I would prefer to take one text for four lessons, because children need to learn to live the lyrics).

The consequence of this program will be that no one will read anything except short content.

And yet - no matter how it grew into all -Russian verification work in literature in each class. So this document is associated with the prospect of joyless and quite alarming.