| Popis: |
Anatoly Kasprzhak - Director, Center of Leadership Development in Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. Address: 13 Milyutinskiy bystr., Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation. E-mail: agkasprzhak@hse.ruThe article deals with the analysis of barriers which do not let to form the Russian teacher training system in line with todays requirements. The author considers reforms of teacher training systems in 12 countries of Asia, Europe and North America which were carried out during last decades of the XXth century: grounds for these reforms, main trends of changes that took place, their nodal elements which in the authors opinion need to be taken into account when planning a teacher training reform in Russia. All actions of reformers come to three main directions: a system of measures aimed at increasing teachers occupational prestige, a package of measures aimed at retention of teachers in schools and transition to such a design of teacher training educational programmes that would help with performing the first two tasks. The reforms resulted in the following changes: the teacher training system ceased to be departmental, and a base unit (a design unit) is now an educational programme ready for continuous variation, and not a structure which fulfills it. The author discusses such indicators of occupational prestige as teacher wage rates in different countries and a training level of applicants at teacher training higher education institutions. There are systems of measures in many countries which have a good track record and make the occupation look attractive for youth: monthly allowances for pupils in the final year of secondary school under the condition that after graduating from a higher education institution they will work not less than three years at school; a special enrollment procedure for those who apply for teacher educational programmes which includes, along with a centralized testing, interviews - in order to appraise acceptability for the teaching profession - creativity competitions, recommendations are requested; possibility to get a teacher education in dif ferent ways; provision of career oppor tunities. The ar ticle shows that there are no institutional arr angements in Russia which would ensure youth retention in the occupation. All changes, including positive ones (formation of a training system for new experts in terms of the Russian school - psychologists, tutors, consultants), are extraordinarily difficult to formalize as legislative acts. And if it still happens, then a new standard is given as a rule according to the old logic which rigidly determines a type of a performers activity. Under such conditions rise of any institutions which would encourage initiatives, reflection concerning results of an innovative search, would induce transformation of the existing structures is just impossible. |
