Continues his research in the field of pedagogical innovation. The object of attention of the winter session was the school, which is called "New", the excursion to it allowed the participants to personally assess the degree of novelty.
The Moscow New School in its ideological embodiment has existed since 2005, but the walls have found only recently. The Dar Foundation, managed by Yulia Veshnikova, spent 12 years looking for a building, forming a team of like-minded people and comprehending the concept of an approach to education.
On September 1, 2017, the process of learning and settling in the New School began, since being present at the lessons and obtaining the necessary knowledge for life should not run counter to life itself, full and rich. The teachers of the New School believe: childhood does not end at the threshold of school, and academic results are the fruits of a keen interest in learning, and not effective cramming. More and more often in pedagogical circles the not stupid idea sounds that children are, first of all, people, and not students. This “human” approach to education is based on the idea of free choice and taking into account the characteristics and interests of children. So in the New School, the implementation of the skills and abilities of the child and the training of harmonious interaction with the world are at the forefront. However, first things first ...
Coffee and croissants with the friendly director of the New School, Kirill Medvedev
“There must be some kind of 'safe' place for teachers in the school,” says its director Kirill Medvedev. At the New School, such a place is a cafe for adults. It was there, in complete "safety", that the first part of the meeting of the School of Teachers and Directors took place. The team of the New School, from the director to the curators, is very young (if not by age, then by heart). In an amazing way, we managed to gather professionals who do not know how to boast of this at all and are eager to bring up thinking people who are ready to make decisions and be responsible for them.
Children and parents are selected to match: it's a common cause. Therefore, an interview with parents is a mandatory stage of admission to school, says Sergei Plakhotnikov, head of elementary school ( note: on his bright red sweatshirt the inscription "Opened notebooks, closed their mouths" flaunts - one of the most common phrases of a comprehensive school, now going down in history).
demonstrates to the participants of the Winter session the device of "carpentry"
Of course, no one canceled mathematics, Russian and English, but it is more important to check whether all three partners are suitable for each other: student-teacher-parents - no one is going to play "boa constrictor" here. Even in the short history of the school, there was a precedent when parents, amazed by the lack of diaries, grades and comments with a red pen, got so confused that they took a completely happy girl into a structure that was more understandable to them (nothing is known about her further fate, but, we think, more and more less good). And the school reserves the right to refuse admission without giving reasons, which, to be honest, only doubles the demand.
By the way, about the economy: one month of education for a child at the New School will cost parents 40 thousand rubles. True, this amount includes meals in a school restaurant (the creators insist on this name, it must be admitted, not without reason), as well as a package of additional education courses. However, the New School is still not a story of making money, because the conditions created in it for students, equipment, maintenance of the building are much more expensive. For example: one hall for the so-called "3D-physical education", which has everything - from a climbing wall to a slide - cost, according to the most rough estimates, 1 million 800 thousand. rubles. The children at the school have access to pottery and cooking, carpentry and a 3D printer, and even a huge aquarium with a couple of friendly green geckos, whose name was chosen through an open competition. And the theater hall of the New School could be envied by some Moscow chamber theaters.
In the theater hall of the New School, you can put on real performances and hold school meetings
The school pays a lot of attention to sports and technology. Seven teachers of sports disciplines (including rhythmic gymnastics and wrestling) and four on technology work with children. There is no grading system: they try to stimulate motivation for learning at the New School by other means. There are no calls from the lesson and to the lesson. They are replaced by philosophical remarks a la "Nine-thirty-nine, but did you manage to do everything?" ...
They also try to avoid homework - there is already a lot of work in the class. Children have adopted the so-called "guesting" (walks through the classrooms and acquaintance with other parallels), some of the classes take place in mixed groups. The first school assembly took place in early December. For senior pupils, the "pass" to the assembly was a junior school student, whom it was imperative to get to know and make friends with. The selection process at the meeting of generations was based on personal sympathy and similarity. But "no one left offended."
Once a month, children visit the museum, pre-selecting it. School meetings are held weekly. Parents are attracted to physical education ("exercise with parents"), as well as joint evenings, often with a guitar, games, creative improvisation.
Gymnasium of the New School
In the basic school, tutors and mediators work with students (special people who are called upon to resolve emerging conflicts). Tutors serve as a kind of "structuring mirror" for a teenager: they fix his goals, aspirations, changes in interests, but do not press, do not call for responsibility and do not reproach. For three months, more than one hundred and thirty training seminars were held for teachers and tutors.
The system of additional education is also widely developed. Currently, about four hundred and eighty children are enrolled in the program. The main directions are sports, music, art and technology. There are classes in robotics that are very popular, undoubtedly computer classes. Ethnic drums and electric guitar are preferred to piano lessons. Both boys and girls attend cooking classes.
Director for the development of additional education of the New School, Yana Kudryavtseva, talks about the specifics of her direction
The new school, in a sense, "trolls" the prohibitions adopted in the old-style school: in the corridors and in the reading room you can find an electronic piano and a drum set with the inviting slogans "You can play!" (fortunately, in the modern world, headphones are widely used).
At the New School, writing on the walls is allowed!
If everywhere children are forbidden to draw on the walls, then special walls for writing and drawing are even created here. So what?! After all, this is self-expression!
Moreover, in the opinion of the teaching staff and the administration of the New School: "School is not only walls!" And even, it would be more accurate to say, first of all, not them.
Photo by Nikolay Seredin
Interesting topic of professional development teacher and leader?
Kirill Medvedev
Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, one of the methodologists of the "Teacher for Russia" program, director of the "New School"
Sergei Volkov
teacher of the Russian language and literature at school No. 57 (1992–2015), associate professor at the Faculty of Philology at the Higher School of Economics (2011–2015), head of the department of literature at the New School
Yulia Veshnikova
Graduate of the Faculty of Philology of Moscow State University, director of the Dar Foundation, founder of the New School
- What principles did you follow when creating the New School?
Medvedev: Any school is looking for an answer to the question of what modern education should be. In private schools, a widespread topic is closedness: we just want to work in the paradigm of openness, we try to attract professionals who are of interest to us. In this sense, the "New School" is a socio-cultural project that includes both the school itself and the educational center.
Veshnikova: At school, we strive to turn almost everything into the educational process. What is called "Education-360", when the child is constantly in the process of learning. Unfortunately, elementary school often makes sure that the child asks as few questions as possible. And only growing up, people understand that a correctly asked question is 80 percent a solution to the problem. Therefore, we encourage children to learn how to ask questions.
Your school welcomes future students with an unusual space. How do you intend to interact with him?
-Medvedev: We are building a school - an environment for the development of the entire community - children, parents, teachers. A corridor, for example, not only serves as a transport function, but is also a place where a child could interact with the school, study, and communicate. We didn't add a lot of color on purpose, as we believe that it should come with the children who will rethink and refine it. The same is with the offices: they are arranged in such a way that you can freely do with the furniture in them. As you can see, the topic of choice and awareness is very important for us: children have to appropriate the space and decide for themselves what will be there. We have a nice fantasy - to put electronic musical instruments with headphones next to the music cabinet so that children can play without disturbing anyone.
The same is the case with the additional education center, which is open in the afternoon. At this time, completely different people will come here, including adults, people, and for them this space should also be unusual, conducive to occupation.
The summer reading list for students of the "New School" is quite extensive and differs from the programs of the leading humanitarian schools in Moscow. Will it be a purely author's course with a certain trajectory and aimed at a certain result?
Chemistry laboratory
© New school
- By what principle was the corps of teachers recruited?
Volkov: I was recruiting language experts. I needed people who know the subject, are adequate, who are interested in living, who are ready to listen and hear another, to enter into a dialogue with the student and who themselves want to learn. They took such people.
Medvedev: We are interested in interesting and original people, but the most important thing is that they are professionals. An essential factor is the value system: a person should care, because work at school is, of course, a matter of life. It is important to be able to negotiate and compare expectations with colleagues and children. We have an emphasis on the tradition of strong schools, but at the same time we expect from teachers flexibility, the ability to learn about the world and adequately respond to it.
Veshnikova: The school is supposed to work as a team, but the team consists of pedagogical stars. People should be able to listen to each other and - despite the fact that they are masters of their field - change their minds if someone's arguments have convinced them. But this should not be confused with betrayal of principles. Rather, it is about a willingness to rethink professional approaches. Unfortunately, some inertia is characteristic of stellar teachers, but we tried to gather those who take the trouble to think and try something new. And our director gives the opportunity to work in a team without an authoritarian regime. In my opinion, this favorably distinguishes us from the majority of very good schools, in which the vertical of power is built and all decisions depend on one person. And if this person - a star - leaves the project, then in a couple of years the school will be closed. It was important for us to build a systemic thing that will live for centuries, like Cambridge: it is not the director's name that matters, but a set of principles that work for a common brand. I hope that Kirill Vladimirovich has the courage to cope with this, because everyone has the temptation to take everything into their own hands.
Medvedev: I have been in the school and university environment for a long time and I know how difficult it is to build a horizontal structure when teachers or heads of departments get together and really decide something. But at the same time, the inclusion of horizontal elements has a great impact for everyone. Therefore, we try to stick to this regime as long as possible. Of course, there are moments when the situation does not come to a common solution, and here it is already necessary to include classical vertical mechanisms.
Veshnikova: Yes, of course, in the process of daily (but I will not say routine!) Work of the New School, the administration, teachers, children will seek, develop, intelligently borrow and implement a variety of pedagogical and organizational approaches and solutions. But the main principles on which the New School is based will be preserved precisely as a system of values, as a base, as a foundation. Therefore, the fund, having prepared, organized, fully financed and launched our project, will not leave it after the start of the academic year. And we are not only talking about material support, about funding, which will be required by the school for a long time, but we are creating the board of trustees and supervisory boards of the "New School" to protect the very values that I spoke about above.
Kitchen laboratory
© New school
Aren't you afraid that, having graduated from the "New School", a person will be lost in the world of understated educational requirements?
Veshnikova: Not at all. If a person has collected a certain number of the necessary cognitive tools, he will find a resource for himself. He will be able to understand whether he is there and whether he has enough opportunities - and if not enough, then how they can be obtained. We want to create an atmosphere of good restlessness in the school so that the person does not stop, but has a habit of constant self-development.
Medvedev: So it is easier to prepare for uncertainty. After all, no one really understands what to expect, what will happen in our life in five years, and how to move towards it. Everyone understands that changes are taking place, and it is important to learn how to cope with it somehow - for both the child and the adult. And not in ten years, but right now. This is a story about choice, and at school we will strive to develop and train the ability to choose. It is very difficult for adults to give a child a lot of choice, but we still think it is important to update this topic.
© New school
Today, in addition to specialized humanitarian (and not necessarily humanitarian) education, there are many open lectures and seminars in schools, many of which have been successfully institutionalized. Does the New School approach differ from the usual formats, in which the figures of the bearer of knowledge are still given priority over those to whom this knowledge is intended?
Medvedev: Good question. We didn't have the original goal to be different. We did not think about the question "What would you like to give up in a mass school?" Rather, it is important for us to take something from there. But at the same time, we made a choice in favor of individual learning paths, implying different possibilities for the child to be able to manage his time. In the high school, which we have not yet launched, even individual schedules and individual curricula are possible. In general, this is a vector where you can move, build your program relative to it. This is not a humanities or math profile - it is a student's personal profile, which implies personal interests, opportunities and aspirations.
Well, the position of the "talking head" a priori should be lowered. The “talking head” implies a simple transfer of knowledge. It seems to us that this should not be so - even in cases where expert opinion is extremely important. There is the experience of colleagues from Yerevan, where no more than 15 minutes per lesson are allocated for the teacher's speech. We did not introduce such special rules, but we still tried to use the subject-subject form of interaction. It is, of course, difficult, but we are plotting a route in this direction. Additional education plays an important role here, where completely different people, unfamiliar to children, come, with whom it is necessary to somehow interact. This is a story about emotional intelligence that is often talked about now.
Volkov: Will we have lecture elements in our lessons? Yes, they will. Does this mean that we have usurped the right to knowledge and are broadcasting from above? Not at all. The lecture can and should be in constant dialogue. In a normal lesson, there is always a lot of talk, debate, discussion. Our situation is not when I know the truth and lead children to it: we all do not know and we are looking for the truth. It's just that I'm a little older and trained more in this business, that's all my difference. And so we go together - and each at the same time in his own direction. So the literature is wonderful, that each person can give his answer to the same question. If in a math problem the answer in the class must coincide (which does not negate different ways of solving it), then we have the coincidence of answers rather a minus than a plus.
Canteen
© New school
- Will there be established communication with higher educational institutions (inviting teachers, courses, using methods) and if so, with which ones?
Medvedev: Interaction has to come naturally, and this is usually the way from below. We first establish communication, and then we institutionalize it. The only question is about specific tasks. Of course, we are in the neighborhood with Moscow State University and we have many contacts at the level of teachers: for example, our head of the biology and chemistry direction closely interacts with the Faculty of Biology and the Botanical Garden. In the mathematical direction there is also a link with the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics. In the same Moscow State University there are laboratories for which it may be important to reach out to specific children and offer them something.
Volkov: I myself work at the Higher School of Economics and the Moscow Art Theater School, so there are already two universities. But seriously, we are building an open education that will be connected by many threads with the world in general and with higher education in particular. Well, it should be said that the founder, and his director, and the director of the school, and, for example, I are graduates of Moscow State University: some of us studied together, walked on the same floors, absorbed the same university air. The school itself partly grew out of it.
- What is the profile of a student entering the New School? What are the expectations for them?
Medvedev: In short, it was important for us that the children already had some kind of subject-cultural base. When a child comes to grades 5-8, he already has a certain level. Our task is to determine this level and attitude towards learning, so we had subject entrance tests (Russian, mathematics, elements of the English language). And then it already depends on the age: in elementary school students we were looking for curiosity and interest in learning. At the final stage, there was an interview with the child and the parents: we wanted to find out whether we are close to the parents in our expectations and to what extent these expectations include the position of the child himself.
Medvedev: We do not want to take a model where along with the mark comes an emotional assessment and, as is often the case, an element of psychological pressure. In the assessment system, we strive to shift the emphasis from scoring to giving feedback, with which a child, parent, and teacher must learn to work. We can say that this is a super task for us.
Why should today's children go to school? What can teachers give them that parents, books and the Internet cannot give them? Anna Nemzer discussed this important topic with experts in the field of education:
Irina Bogantseva, director of the private school "European Gymnasium";
Kirill Medvedev, teacher of mathematics, head of the Creative Laboratory of the Second School Lyceum;
Konstantin Levushkin, teacher at the Letovo school, methodologist at the Arzamas academy and the Teacher for Russia program;
Dima Zitser, teacher, director of the Institute of Non-formal Education INO.
Photo: Pavel Lisitsyn / RIA Novosti
Nemzer: Firstly, I congratulate you all on this day, except, perhaps, Igor Moiseevich, but I also congratulate you, just in case. I want to say that, of course, I took on an absolutely immense topic. Actually, this is an occasion for several round tables or a thesis. I will choose three or four points of discussion, and besides that, I would like to try to focus us on such a tunnel of conversation - so that today we talk about the interests of the student. It is clear that the teacher and the director have their own interests, but I think that each of those present in their work proceeds primarily from the interests of the student. Through this, I would like to build our conversation.
For myself, the first part I tentatively designated as "Parent and Child". The first question I would like to ask Igor Moiseevich. Homeschooling ideologues oppose parent-child separation. They say that the school is an institution that provides for this department, but in principle it is not very natural and organic. Where can you find a parent who will be ready to give up his own interests and, possibly, work and devote all the time to teaching the child?
Chapkovsky: There are quite a lot of such parents, and it is growing. When we started (and we started in 1986, in another country and in other conditions), these were very few. People at that time were very reserved, they tried not to show themselves that they were such clever people, according to Soviet legislation, they could be deprived of parental rights.
In 1992, the law allowed family education. So they called it, education in the family, and not external studies or something like that. For a long time, people did not actually react to this. Only in the last two years can we say that family education has become a social phenomenon. Kommersant published information that 15% of people support this case (this does not mean that they have chosen this form). These percentages are a consequence of other statistics recognized by the Ministry of Education. The level of education in the secondary school system is falling, and the school threatens the health of the child - this is also known.
Parents who are fixing the system say: "I need to educate my child." Where are these parents, I can tell you. There is a simple parental question: "We want our child to have a happy childhood, to be healthy and that education does not encroach on either his happiness or his health."
Since many people have already gone this way, have received successful results, the number of people is growing, plus the system itself pushes for this by the circumstances that I told you about.
Nemzer: It's clear.
I will ask one more question. Until what point do you think the joint parent-child project should hold on? Ideally, should this continue until university? How do you see this picture?
Chapkovsky: No. The point is that a person becomes an adult. As he grows up, the rights that his parents formally legally represented are physically transferred to this child. There is an age psychology that captures different moments. At some point, ordinary boys begin to value their independence. If you do not reckon with it, then nothing will come of it.
I will tell you in practice, running a little ahead of myself, that family education has a definite purpose. It is simply called - to teach a child to independently acquire knowledge. This usually happens after going through the preliminary stages, which I will not dwell on, by the seventh to eighth grade. Sometimes it never happens, and you have to babysit this child until university. But there are such figures. How to achieve them, teach a child to study independently - this happens in many families.
Nemzer: The average temperature in the hospital is by the seventh grade ...
Chapkovsky: By the seventh, more often girls, by the eighth - boys. They learn to learn on their own.
Nemzer: Okay, we'll get back to this conversation. Then I ask a question to representatives of different schools. Indeed, the school assumes a separation of parent and child. When we say: “I am doing my homework with the child until late at night,” as a rule, this is perceived as a deviation from the norm. When we say: “My child does everything himself, I don’t take any part in this at all, he is absolutely independent,” this seems to be the norm, this is good.
Does the school involve some kind of parental involvement, is it necessary and to what extent? Irina Vladimirovna, maybe you will start?
Bogantseva: Our very conversation and the people who have gathered here testify that the school as an institution is going through a crisis. People see different ways out of this crisis. Exactly in your words, Igor Moiseevich, I thought 24 years ago, when I already had ten years of experience as a teacher at school, then I worked at the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences.
My third child was born, it was a girl (the first two are boys). Somehow I was especially sorry for her. Such a little girl. Moreover, each time you learn to be a mother more and more. I saw the wrong way out of the crisis situation that you propose. I thought that I would make a kindergarten for this wonderful girl, very small, just so that the girl had more girlfriends. A very intimate place.
This thread stretched further. It turned out that a very good kindergarten cannot be made very small. All the best that I had to surround her: the best specialists, conditions - require financial investments. I am not an oligarch even close, I did not have any special money, which means that I had to earn these investments without leaving the machine.
This is another way out of this crisis. Of course, when we say that the level of education is falling, this, comrades, is the average temperature in the hospital. There is no educational level. There is a second school, there will probably also be an excellent school, there is a "European Gymnasium", there are some schools of a completely different level not named here. We will add and divide all this, it will be the level of education. This does not exist in nature.
Nemzer: We can not talk about the average temperature in the hospital now. I have a very specific question.
Bogantseva: As far as parents are concerned, of course, parents have very little experience of participation. The involvement of a parent should not, in my opinion, consist in the fact that he should do homework with the child. For example, in first grade there should be no homework. And then the child should more or less be able to do it himself.
In this case, the parent is not excluded. For example, one day a student's dad came to a graduation party. I saw him for the first time. The graduation party was interesting and beautifully organized. He said: "What, it turns out, this is a good school!" He found it out at the prom. And who would not let him go on a hike with us, go to Bashkiria, Great Britain, Italy on an art history excursion? Who did not let him come, as my Chinese mother did, and make us a tea ceremony? That dad, probably, also knew something of his own. By the way, he was a fairly well-known filmmaker. There was an unplowed field for activity, no one would have stopped him, but somehow it did not occur to him. Although we urge a parent to do just that, to contribute to our common life.
Nemzer: That is, it is more likely that parents are incorporated not into the educational process itself.
Bogantseva: Why? It can also be an educational process. For example, we have a notary parent. I taught social studies last year and invited her on the topic "Notary".
Nemzer: Perfectly.
Kirill, maybe you can tell me how, from your point of view, a parent should fit into the educational process?
Medvedev: A few words about public schools. I would say there are two points in the relationship between school and parents that can be called bad. The first point is if the school is completely closed and defends itself from parents. Full of examples, this is very bad. Another option is if the parents withdraw themselves from some kind of interaction with the school and reflection.
If we are talking about family education, obviously, they should be much more immersed in the fate of the child. When a child is sent to a public school, this does not mean that he was sent there. In our community there is a jargon "school-safe": I passed my child, now I am free, I can go to work.
Bogantseva: With regard to private schools, this is an even more common position among parents. I handed over, paid the money, what do you want from me now? Of course, it is sad when a parent takes such a position, but this is not because the school supplants him, but because he is so arranged, poor fellow. He does not receive something from life himself in this way.
Nemzer: Kostya, you are still building the school of the future, to call a spade a spade. There is no school, it should be launched in 2018. How do you imagine this process, how is it spelled out for you?
Levushkin: I’m not a director, I should have called Mikhail Gennadievich in this regard. I can only discuss this issue from the position of a boarding school teacher.
Nemzer: Perfectly!
Levushkin: From a teacher's perspective, my personal experience of interacting with parents was rather negative.
Nemzer: Your parents are bothering you.
Levushkin: Not for me. It's hard for me to interfere. I have a feeling that they interfered with the child a little. In high school, a disaster begins, because parents embody their interests and desires through the child, through the circles.
Nemzer: Can you give an example of how this was expressed?
Levushkin: There are a lot of these examples, from the choice of the faculty and the university to the choice of circles and a set of exams. Let me give you one example. The girl came to England to study the language. The first lesson was even more or less cheerful, then she burst into tears. They ask her what happened, and she says: "You know, my mother insisted that I learn six languages in this camp." On the sixth or even on the third, she broke.
When my parents quite often tried to interfere with my work, like “Give them more,” “Pass this one more with them,” I had to cut it off very hard. I personally did not have a resource to work with parents, although it should be.
Chapkovsky: I want to say that in 1990, when I had already accumulated some experience, I published an article in the Courant newspaper entitled “The system cannot be corrected, it is hostile to the child”. Even these teachers' reasoning about parents is condescending. I don’t want to offend any of you, but these performances are even illegal. The law provided for what we in everyday life call "parents are the main people for a child." The law formulated this very clearly: parents - legal representatives, have a priority right over all other persons, including teachers, in the field of upbringing and education.
I thought to myself: if I were a director, a person comes to me with priority rights in relation to his child, and I begin to explain to him: "You are doing wrong, you are interfering with my studies." The school system itself was considered by me as a system where parents are deprived of their parental rights. They are somehow biased. From good teachers you can hear: "The parent interfered with the child's teaching."
I think this is a huge distortion, which, of course, comes from how the class-lesson system was born. I can say in a nutshell: it was born as a request of an industrial society. Illiterate parents could not educate their children, the society began to educate them. It is clear that for illiterate parents you were the priests of science. It was simply impossible to say something bad about the teacher until the age of 50. Then they began to sort it out somehow, when the system was corrected. In short, I can say so about it.
Bogantseva: About the preemptive right. A very real little example. Dad gave the boy to our school and then wanted to talk to me about this. He says: “Here I gave Sasha, you keep him stricter. If necessary, then screw it up. I give you that right. " He has a preemptive right, he delegates it to me.
I told him: “You know, we have concluded an agreement on your child in six pages in small print. There is not a single point that I will smack him. " He says: "Look, I was flogged, and now I'm a businessman who can pay you, I'm cool." I sit and think: "If you had not been flogged, maybe you would not have been a middle-class businessman, but would have become the president of the country with your abilities, which they hammered into you and blocked you with a nail?"
I don’t tell him this, I just answer: “You know, probably, we will not be able to cooperate with you. Our pedagogical concept does not include your pedagogical measures. " He went to some other place to exercise his preemptive right, but we did not subscribe to this right.
Chapkovsky: This is fine.
Bogantseva: So the rights are different, you know? Many parents dispose of their child as if it were their property. This is not the case. They did not give birth to a child in the world, in order to do with him and out of him whatever they want.
Chapkovsky: If we criticize the school, I will tell you a lot. You start criticizing your parents. Parents are different.
Bogantseva: And schools are different. We will come to this and stop.
Nemzer: We really do not set the task of agreeing, moreover, I do not believe that we will come to any common answer. I think we will all agree that you can't flog.
Bogantseva: Why should we negotiate? Look, we present four different education options. Each of them has a right to exist. There is no need to prove: "I am so beautiful, everything is right with me, and let the rest do not exist."
Chapkovsky: It's not about that. If we talk about the interests of the child, as the question was posed, no one has been invented for them better than their parents, that's all.
Bogantseva: Parents are different.
Chapkovsky: No. What do you mean different? As soon as the rights of parents are infringed upon, the collapse of the family and the state begins. Parents have a restriction, it is regulated by criminal law. Until then, no one is better than parents, whatever they are, for the child.
Bogantseva: This is your point of view, you can have it.
Nemzer: Dear friends, we have all expressed ourselves on this issue. I think we will move on to the next topic, which is much more difficult and complex. I would like to pass it, but, unfortunately, I will not succeed. One way or another, in a modern school, the child is really separated from his parents. One way or another, the modern school is an institution of hierarchy and power. With the most democratic-minded directors and teachers, it is still a kind of pyramid, at the head of which is the director. Further there are teachers, at the bottom of the pyramid are children.
The school has a problem of violence. I categorically do not want to discuss specific cases now, talk about bullying, about horizontal bullying of students by students or cases of violation of pedagogical ethics. These cases are a million, we will drown in them.
We would like to understand one thing. The school, unfortunately, is a really hierarchical structure and not democratic in its structure. The student is somehow defenseless. If students are not given full guarantees of safety, how can they create a sense of protection, a feeling that they can come and talk about their problems?
Cyril, let’s you start.
Medvedev: Since I am a representative of a public school, which is seen as the prototype of the terrible hierarchical pyramid that devours children at the lower level. In good schools, the design is multi-aspect and multi-layered, on different layers of which different things happen. In some situations, there is no hierarchy.
I think colleagues in the school sector will agree that when they talk about a good school, they definitely talk about a good atmosphere, acceptance, mutual assistance, and so on. It is formed very subtly: for example, how a teacher addresses students. He can call them friends, colleagues, he can really think so, and not do it for show.
In our school, for example, it is customary to communicate informally with children, go on hikes, organize camps. They don't leave our school and talk, and this is actually a security system for this entire complex system. There is some kind of self-government, children's request, with which teachers work. Where the school is sensitive, it tries to build protective barriers and work with the parent so as not to miss a problem. It happens that parents do not see something that they see in the school walls, and vice versa. In this sense, the school has the option not to create a factory with pants color hierarchy levels.
Nemzer: I didn't even mean what you are talking about. Anyway, one way or another, there are lessons, a schedule, grades. It is clear that in good schools a lot of effort is spent to create a friendly atmosphere, informal relationships, hiking and so on. But this structure is still quite difficult to get away from.
Boarding school. The parent is separated from the child quite thoroughly. How to ensure the protection of the child there, how to create a sense of security for him, Kostya?
Levushkin: Are we just about protection and safety or about the freedom of the child? I understand a little more about the second than about the first.
Nemzer: It seems to me that these are pretty closely related things. A free child feels free, among other things, to pay attention to his problems, not to be pinched.
Levushkin: Once again, I will skip the topic of the boarding school, because it has not yet been created, what can I say about this? Dima Zitser will tell you about this wonderfully if he joins.
If we talk about class boundaries, then these boundaries exist, of course. It is not possible to destroy them at school now. But you can blur them as much as possible. For me, the ideal student is the one who, after a year or six months, will begin to ask uncomfortable questions and do something like the following: at the beginning of the lesson, the topic, question, and method of solving it are announced. The child says: “It seems to me that this method is not very successful. My mood is so-so, after math - especially, so let's restructure your lesson. " The teacher must be ready for this.
I am not dissembling, this is an ideal, this year I will implement this model, abandoning the lesson system and conducting project cycles for at least three to five lessons, where children are free, work at their own pace and, unfortunately, solve in the given corridors, but those tasks that seem important to them.
Bogantseva: You spoke of hierarchy and school as evil in terms of hierarchy. In fact, when a child comes to the first grade today, he already knows everything about hierarchy and power, because no one has and never will have the power that parents have. What is power, he knows, feels and will feel in the future. And we settled down only somewhere on the side, although we settled down, yes. We can say they have been added.
Indeed, I agree with you that a child should feel protected. If this is an elementary school, then we rely on the fact that the teacher should be the one who is this protection, including the gasket between the children, which protects them a little from each other, sees them well and knows, loves and understands. It is simpler here, because children are small, this is not yet adolescence, when natural aggression is more developed in them.
When it’s a secondary school, from the fifth grade (just in the fourth grade they are already entering adolescence) ... At our school we have a very important tool for protecting children - school rules that have existed for about 15 years. They were developed by children, they change a little almost every year, because the real situation changes, through discussion at the school parliament. We have such a body that is elected every year.
There was a case when one girl seriously violated discipline at school. The girl recently came to school, probably, she did not know our rules very well yet. She was in ninth grade. The question was literally before me that I should expel this girl from school. Many demanded this.
Nemzer: Teachers, your colleagues?
Bogantseva: And students. They look at everything much more strictly than teachers.
And I didn't want to do it. I thought: "She just came, has not yet got used to it, you never know." I come to the library and say: "Give me the school rules, I will see what I should do in this case, how I should act." And the librarian says: "There is no copy, this girl took it." She decided to study what would become of her for what she had done.
You see, we both came to the same point. At this point, we do not have the director's arbitrariness: I like or dislike this student, I will do this to him. There is some kind of legislation, I want to act in accordance with it. And she knows that they will do this to her. This, in my opinion, is protection. This is called democracy, which is the worst form of government, apart from all the others, as Churchill said.
Nemzer: Dima, we have discussed a number of issues. Tell me, how do you think it is right to provide protection at school, how to provide some kind of immunity outside of school, and what do you generally think about all of the above?
Zitser: Let's figure out who and from whom we want to provide protection.
Nemzer: There is a problem that I mentioned earlier. There are different variants of violence at school, the problems can arise very different: horizontal, vertical, and so on. How to make sure that the child at school feels safe, knows who to go to with his trouble, and so that the school hierarchy does not put pressure on him at this moment, so that he is free?
Zitser: I suggest that you return to the topic of today's broadcast to answer this question. If I remember correctly, it sounds like "Why do you need a school?" It seems to me that the conversation is always about why adults need school. Why do children need school? For me, the answer is quite obvious: a person will be protected the moment he finds himself in a place about which he understands very well what he is doing there, why he came there, why he chose him, what brought him there, and so on.
If we remain in the paradigm that adult uncles and aunts will decide for not very well-understood creatures, why they need a school, how to organize their life, everyday life, and so on, it seems to me that a person can never be protected. This structure will not allow a person to be protected. He will always be in danger. I suppose you understand why.
Adults are different. There was already a conversation about the parents. Both parents and teachers and the casual adults we meet. If we, as teachers, are ready to say that we will decide for him, what kind of protection can we talk about? Is it possible?
Nemzer: Dima, I highly welcome the transfer of all initiative to the child.
Zitser: And who said that the whole initiative?
Nemzer: Looking into the eyes of reality: first grade, the person is seven years old. I fully admit that there are situations when a child goes to school for the first time on September 1, returns home, says: "I don't want to anymore," and the parent says: "Okay, whatever you say, it will be so." But such cases are few. Still, it is rather difficult to erase the parental paternalistic model. How to be in this situation?
Zitser: What does “parental paternalistic model” mean? Some of the interlocutors said that the parent is the most important person for the child. Of course, this is true up to a certain age, certainly up to seven years. The parent falls into a multi-vector influence. It is influenced by the school, our program, articles, radio and so on. The parent, in a certain sense, finds himself in the field of hysteria or, in any case, serious pressure. At this point, the parent should be helped.
I do not share the idea of a paternalistic parenting approach. It seems to me that everything is much more complicated and simpler. A parent is a person who loves him, often completely. The child definitely loves him completely. The parent must be on his side. I'll give you a simple example. How is the parent meeting in first grade organized? Adult uncles and aunts gather and, wrinkling their foreheads, discuss how to organize the life of a seven-year-old creature. I can't find another noun because there isn't one.
What will change, for example, dear friends, if the parents' meeting is organized as follows: we will have the person of seven years old you mentioned, mom or dad, teacher, and they will all discuss how his life is organized? Can't we say more? Doesn't a person feel protected at this moment? Will not at this moment the teacher understand that he is doing a really good and very important deed, because this is the very help and support of the individual? Wouldn't the parent at this moment feel calmer when he says: “Here he is, my beloved person, here is a teacher who is important in his life, here I am. We talk together. This is called dialogue. " Like this, for example.
You will tell me: "There is inertia, a certain model, in which we drag ourselves and our own children." Let's change it. Not a single person will prohibit this form of parenting meetings that I am talking about. Schools appear where this model is being implemented.
Chapkovsky: First, your statement of the question does not take into account one obvious thing. The hierarchical model of the family has passed the test of the history of mankind and led to the fact that society developed. You are missing one very important point when discussing the hierarchical model of the school. At the very bottom there is a community that is nowhere in life. It is called the same age. From the point of view of any psychologist, it objectively generates aggression.
Zitser: If the adults decide that peers of the same age will be locked in one circle, change that.
Chapkovsky: Communication of the same age is an objective environment for the emergence of aggression, because every person wants to be a person. You have not answered the question of why bullying exists. This is the same phenomenon that has its own basis. One of its roots is a fellowship of the same age, which does not exist anywhere else in life, except for the conscript army.
You start talking about special schools, but how are schools built? On a territorial basis. Neighbors do not choose each other, the teacher does not choose his class. This is a kind of mechanical system. Bullying and hating are not just a property of our system. This is a worldwide phenomenon. A group of the same age that does not exist in life, it turns out, prepares for life. There are no such groups, she does not cook.
Nemzer: Dima, can you tell us something about this?
Zitser: I don't quite understand what the question is. The description I just heard fits a prison, an army. If it's obvious, let's change this system. I strongly disagree with my colleague that there are only such schools. The world education system is changing dramatically. This is a completely different topic, but what has happened over the past 12 years, for example, in education in the UK, is a revolution. Perhaps it has not reached us, or we don’t want to see it.
I am not saying that one should only do the same as in Great Britain ...
Chapkovsky: What, have they stopped flogging there?
Zitser: To present this system as a given ... At first, it turns out that we, the adult world, organized it in this way and provoked bullying, - I agree that it happens precisely for this reason, or this is one of the reasons, - and then throw up our hands and say: “Friends, look, they have bullying, let's intervene again ”, it seems to me, just dishonorable on the part of the adult world in relation to the children's world.
If we understand what the reason is, then the power is on our side. This is not a joke, not a mistake, this is how the world works. In this sense, we can help them and ourselves, by the way.
