|
Russia Part One
Education in Russia was more ideologically based. It was presented in an authoritarian teaching style, which reinforced discipline and learning by being instructed. Students were prepared to accept hierarchy. According to Hofstede, Russia is a more collectivist country than individualist. The individual should conform to the rule of the majority, and expressing one's ideas is not rewarded positively. The curriculum was more 'technocratically/scientifically' designed. Hence there were many hours of study with a lot of material to be learnt. With such a heavy curriculum, it is difficult to have time for personal innovations. The responsibility of the individual finds its meaning in the individual’s conformation to society’s values.
". . . I think [the students were] very responsible, because the rules for passing the exam were much more strict in Russia than anywhere else, because if you fail, you run the risk to be expelled from the university completely . . .",says the first Russian interviewee. The second interviewee gives more explanations: "There is one constant group of thirty or fourty, who study always together. And it is, for example, like this that when I choose this university, I know exactly what will happen in this term, in second term, and in this or that term. It is all regulated, and here I have no responsibility, we can’t choose ourselves . . . on the other hand, it is a lot of responsibility, because we have to work much, much more in comparison to here."
The first interviewee adds: ". . . we have already a set curriculum, and you have to attend every subject that is on the curriculum . . . no such a system of obligatory and selective subjects. And you have to attend the classes . . . and if your not attend, um, you may be severely punished for that . . ."
The amount of work that is given to the students is not comparable to the Western system of education. Education in Russia is more rigid and consistent. Interviewee 1 says, ". . . I think the amount of homework is very much big and basing, basing, my, to base my experience on my studies in the US, so I think we are pretty much overloaded with homework. And, yes, there is a system of controlling whether you did your homework and how you did your homework . . ." According to the second interviewee: ". . . [control] is always, or almost always . . . for example, when I miss one seminar, for whatever reason, I have to catch up with it later . . . I must make an appointment with the professor, and we speak together about the theme of the seminar. And then he puts a plus or something that, okay, she was not there but she knows the subject well . . ."
The strict, completely regulated system of hierarchy hinders more personal or equal relations between the students and the professor. With regard to influential relationships, Interviewee 1 says, ". . . directly no, I mean—all that was on a personal basis . . . [the relationship] certainly more formal than in the West, but it doesn’t exclude absolutely the– the, um, possibility of having a more close contact. . . . Well, it is more respectful and formal than in the West." Interviewee 2 adds: ". . . students and professors, it is more distance between them, because everything is so regulated . . . for example, we can’t say 'hi' or say ‘du’ to the professor . . . you can’t simply do it . . ."
Due to the economic problems, the services that the university can offer are not optimal. Interviewee one declares: ". . . that’s absolutely deplorable reality in Russia, I mean, nothing stands to standards to the western, and we suffered greatly because of that, and the studies suffer as well . . ." The problem of shortages are solved through collectivist culture characteristics. Each person has her/his own network, which can be used if the necessity arises: ". . . as for the services I wouldn’t say much . . . they don’t have much money and they don’t offer much . . . when I needed to type something, or my presentation, or something else, then I had to use other ways, through acquaintances who work in an office, or—and everybody had some private way of solving the problem. Otherwise the university couldn’t help . . ."
In a collectivist culture the necessity of receiving help from those outside the individual’s immediate group is not imaginable. Interviewee one states: ". . . counselling is somehow not liked with us. The contacts among the people are different. And when I have problems, then I don’t come to think of going to a counsellor, because I talk about it at a private level. I go to my family or friends or students from higher terms who have experienced the problem before and can give me some pieces of advice . . ."
In such a culture, there are many unwritten as well as written rules which should be taken into consideration in social relationships. Politics, then, plays an important role. On the subject of politics, Interviewee one says: ". . . oh, yes,
absolutely, um–sometimes it gets very much partial or not very objective on the part of the teacher so and it doesn’t really depend on your knowledge and your abilities, it may be a very strong personal influence and so in order for example to pass and exam or to get a good grade, you have to, um, for time forget about your principles, and do sort of einschleimen [ingratiate oneself with the teacher], you know what I mean . . . there is no, any system in relations between people, everything is based on, you know, personal attitudes and the stuff, so this would predetermine relations with the academics."
This view is also supported by the second interviewee: ". . . definitely, ja, naturally, – and ja . . . there are, of course, people who like to do bootlicking . . . but there is simply another sort of strategy. One should not be always honest, but simply not al- not always express your opinion. You have your opinion, but at this moment it is better if you don’t say it, because I know exactly, with this person one can–it simply doesn’t work, and otherwise I will fail in the exam and I will have problems . . . he can always find some kind of fault in you, your weakness. And I don’t know how, but in any way he has the power . . . one has to use tactics. Other ways don’t work . . ."
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
