This work examines the current state of Russian education on the basis of data of the researches which were carried out in recent years in our educational institutions. The main attention is focused on an explanation of existing distinctions and identification of the factors influencing the training results rather than on ranging educational institutions by level of pupil preparation. Similar researches make it possible to reveal strong sides and weaknesses of Russian education and to trace a course of actions for more effective achievement of the scheduled purposes.
This article is devoted to a comparative analysis of the basis for youth education concepts of political, patriotic and civic education. Today, the problem of integrating the educational component into the system of state policy in the field of higher education and state youth policy is of high relevance, that's why the problem of youth education are widely presented in scientific discourse. The most political science studies are devoted to patriotic education and less to civic education. As a result, Russian social and humanitarian scholars examine exclusively the theoretical, methodological and instrumental foundations of these areas of educational activity. At the same time, the political education is poorly studied both at the conceptual and methodological levels, which is associated with the reduction of the political component in educational processes for a long time.
In the last thirty years we witnessed to a number of relevant innovations and changes. Some of them belong to the information technology domain and parts of them were the reason why the IT domain became the ICT domain. In order to better understand problems and issues related to education and learning it is useful to outline some of the most relevant achievements and milestones in the technological domain. If we focus on the European approach to the spread of information technology termed in the '90ies "Information Society" we can find initiatives such as i2015 the EU policy framework for the information society and media for the 1 next decade and, at global level, the WSIS+10 a ten years activity aimed to draw the guidelines for an harmonious and fruitful development of the information society. It promotes the positive contribution that information and communication technologies can make to the economy, society and personal quality of life. Everyone experienced in "ICT based innovation" knows that "It is not only a matter of technology". Of course technology advances are one of the potential actors as in the case of the diffusion of personal computing or easy access to digital networking. Anyway different parameters are actively influencing e-Services success or failure: cultural aspects, organisational issues, bureaucracy and workflow, infrastructure and technology in general, user's habits, literacy, capacity, market models, interaction design or merely mind-set! Before looking in detail how all these aspects are impacting on education and learning let's take into account some additional relevant aspects.
The article deals with the main directions of cooperation in the sphere of education within the framework of the Union State. The novelty of the study lies in the fact that for the first time it formulates and introduces the authors' research position, clearly outlines the boundaries separating the processes which take place within the Union State, and traces the development of the Russian-Belarusian interaction. In the context of this concept the authors identify and formulate the main stages of development of these processes and systematize the main trends of formation of the normative-legal base of the common educational space and measures for its practical implementation. They examine the interaction between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus within the Union State framework in the general context of the Union State building. The following stages are outlined: the preliminary stage from 1995 through 1999 included the maintenance of equal rights of citizens at the level of interstate relations and in the beginning of the Union State building; the second stage from 1999 through 2012 provided the normative-legal base of the educational space of the Union State and implementation of the existing norms; the third stage from 2012 through 2018 was characterized by gradual growth of attention of the governing bodies of the Union State to the problems of humanitarian cooperation, adaptation of the normative-legal acts to the actual changes in the sphere of education of the two countries; the fourth stage from 2018 until now is regarded as a high time for formation of a single space of education of the Union State for further development of integration. The article categorizes and characterizes the actions taken by the bodies of the Union State, educational institutions and professional circles in order to develop cooperation in the field of education. The study identifies the role of diaspora public organizations in the processes under consideration. The authors conclude about the special role of educational and scientific organizations, professional associations and civil society institutions of the two countries in the development of a unified educational space.
The emblem of the Federal Education and Science Supervision Service contains a crossing of the scroll (a symbol of knowledge) and the so-called fasces, Lictor's axe and a bundle of rods. The Romans borrowed this sinister symbol from the Etruscans. It meant the right of authorities to execute and punish their people. The same symbol can be seen in the emblems of two more government agencies: Federal Penal Service and Federal Bailiff Service. It comes to mind that "fascism" derives from "fasces", doesn't it? The character of the present-day government policy towards the system of higher education is rather penal. The flow of new prohibitions, restrictions and demands coming from the power structures is very strong. As usual, the purposes are good: to raise the quality of education, to stop "selling diplomas", and to bring Russian institutions of higher education to the level of high international ratings. How efficient is this policy? Does it encourage renovation of the system of higher education? Does it support the leading universities in their competition for a student or a highly qualified professor, as well as for the prestige of Russian architectural school? Where does the current trend in professional education lead? Does it have any alternatives? As usual, the materials of the Education section are full of urgent and thorny issues. ; В гербе Федеральной службы по надзору в сфере образования и науки (Рособрнадзора) изображены скрещенный свиток (символ знаний) и так называемый фасций, ликторский топорик и пучок розог, стянутых ремнем. Символ, надо сказать, довольно зловещий: римляне переняли этот символ у этрусков, и означал он право властей казнить и наказывать своих подданных. Этот же символ присутствует в гербах еще двух государственных структур – Федеральной службы исполнения наказаний и Федеральной службы судебных приставов. Не вспомнить ли, что от слова «фасций» происходит слово «фашизм»? Современная политика государства по отношению к системе высшего образования в значительной степени несет карательный характер. Все новые запреты, ограничения, требования бурным потоком льются из властных кабинетов. Цель, как всегда, вполне благая – повысить качество образования, прекратить «торговлю дипломами», вывести российские вузы на уровень высоких международных рейтингов. Насколько эффективна такая политика? Способствует ли она обновлению системы высшего образования? Помогает ли передовым вузам в борьбе за абитуриента, за преподавателя высшей квалификации, за авторитет российской школы архитектурного образования? Куда ведет отечественную архитектуру сегодняшний тренд в профессиональном образовании и есть ли ему альтернативы?Как обычно, материалы раздела «Образование» полны вопросов – жгучих, болезненных, актуальных.
