According to media reports, the State Duma is preparing a bill to abolish the "classic format" of homework at school. It is obvious that it will affect almost every Russian family and will cause the most acute discussions, both in the teaching community and in society as a whole. It cannot be otherwise, because the future of any country is determined, first of all, by the state and quality of its schools.
After all, it is the school that is the main tool for the preservation and reproduction-the transfer of national culture and tradition. Besides, the school is a very delicate tool, and its reform must be approached very carefully, measured seven times seven times, because children are not material for experiments. And over the Russian school, in the same 90s, they experimented more than enough. And the result is too well known — without tears, and very bitter, you can't tell about it. Now, it seems, it is planned to introduce the next, and very radical, "pedagogical innovations", of course, "progressive" and "in line with the spirit of the times," but how else.And now, in connection with these "innovations", which, generally speaking, are difficult to discuss seriously, I remember, by a sinful deed, one movie — the movie "Blinded by Desires", shot not just anywhere, but in Hollywood, in the rather distant year 2000. In it, in one of the episodes, it is shown how the devil, tempting a person, assumes the image of a teacher, very pretty and very democratic. Finishing the lesson, during which she explains to the students that they do not need to learn what is not useful in life, this "teacher" literally says the following: "there will be no homework"!
and in return, he recommends "watching more TV and playing computer games." Such a funny movie. No wonder, however, they say that real life is sometimes scarier and funnier than any movie. Especially in our days, when Progress is striding by leaps and bounds and, perhaps, the time is not far off when the blessed "humanity" will remember and sing in a single impulse the song once popular in the first country of victorious socialism: "We were born to (cinema)make a fairy tale come true."In any case, the same words that the movie devil uttered in the fairy tale film a quarter of a century ago are now quite officially spoken by some Russian politicians. And someone even surpassed the "Hollywood source", stating, literally, that "homework is the main lie of the 21st century." Commenting on this, as they say, only spoils. Obviously, only some really completely new, unconventional people can say something like that. Ordinary, "old", "traditional" (someone, maybe, will say "outdated") People who don't run headlong for Progress and have not yet completely lost their common sense, they are unlikely to think of such a thing. But the very idea of canceling homework at school, it seems, is not only "new", but also to some quite ordinary people, it seems "worthy of consideration," and even at the "legislative level." I have to say, therefore, that a real "consideration", that is, a meaningful discussion of such "innovative ideas", is not the easiest task. It is known, after all, that it is difficult to prove the obvious. Go, for example, prove that it is necessary to love the Motherland, — there will immediately be a bunch of liberal-progressive "smart guys" who will begin to "explain" — "we are not exactly against it," but "if we figure it out," then "homeland is only a word, in essence, an empty sound." and/or that "not a person for the motherland, but the motherland for a person." And so on, and so forth — in general, a well-known set of left-liberal propaganda stamps will be "voiced".,
It's about the same with the cancellation of homework at school. The first thing they will say is what kind of cancellation, we are not talking about cancellation, but about replacement. Replacing the "classic (read outdated, leftists don't like classics for some reason) format" with "research projects", "creative assignments" and other wonderful things. And even "motivate" - "after all, today, when spaceships are plowing the open spaces... they are modern children..., and he is "artificial intelligence"... And also, they will definitely tell about "independent", and about "critical thinking", of course, about "development", except about "personal growth" they will be ashamed (and thank you for that) to mention. But most of all, of course, they will talk about "creativity". This word is generally very much loved by all kinds of idlers (self—designation - "creative people") and all kinds of charlatans, especially from the "science of pedagogy", it is good for them that it can be added to anything. In general, the standard "progressive-humanistic" chatter will rise, when the discussion is essentially not conducted, meaningful arguments and concrete facts are replaced by pseudo-intellectual "noise", false moralizing and putting ideological labels on opponents.
And if it is really in essence, without the same chatter, and even relying on real experience and common sense, then the "problem" is very simply solved. And one can only wonder how respectable adults, even if they are "new", may not understand (it is impossible, in fact, to suspect them of malice) such simple, by and large, self-evident things. But if, nevertheless, someone is so progressive that he requires evidence, "arguments and facts", then let him start bending his fingers (well, or unbending, as is customary in the West). Fact number 1 — the classic, traditional "format" of homework has always been and remains a necessary element of the educational (educational and educational) process in any normal traditional school. Therefore, classical (traditional) homework is nothing but a traditional value, the same as the traditional school itself.
And, in connection with this statement, we will cite, as information for reflection, fact number 2 — Russia in the 20th century experienced two "progressive revolutions" both times, and immediately after the "Victory of the Proletariat", and from the very beginning of the "Perestroika", revolutionaries, without delay and seriously, took up traditional school, destroying it in every possible way. Moreover, both times in the twenties and in the nineties, they spoke literally the same words. They talked about the need to abandon "cramming" and introduce new "advanced pedagogical methods and technologies", debunked "authoritarian pedagogy" and "connected school with life", insisting on the priority of "practical skills and competencies" over "abstract knowledge". And, of course, they introduced new progressive subjects, canceled not only homework, but also exams, and taught "creativity" and "independent thinking" with might and main. And, by the way, let's note, by the way, that the "pedagogical innovations" of the revolutionaries of the 20s and 90s are not only very similar to each other, but also very reminiscent of the progressive "pedagogical methodology" that the she-devil "teacher" practiced in her lesson in the aforementioned Hollywood film.
However, God be with him, with the movie. We will not draw conclusions (especially since they may turn out to be very far—reaching), but simply cite fact number 3, - in In Russia, both in the 20s and 90s, the introduction of "pedagogical innovations" that destroy the traditional school led to a sharp drop in the level of knowledge of schoolchildren. In the first case, in order to correct the situation, a special resolution of the Central Committee was adopted, with an "politically incorrect" but accurate name, "On pedological perversions" and was followed, initiated by Stalin, by a return to the classical education system, when the pre—revolutionary gymnasium was actually taken as a model, which led to the fact that the Soviet school really began to give high-quality, one of the best in the world, education. And after the 90s, the "pedagogical innovations" gradually, somehow by themselves, fizzled out — they were "corrected" by life itself, although their consequences still poison this very life (primarily school, but not only).
If someone does not have enough domestic experience, then there is no problem, you can attract foreign experience. Moreover, all this progressive-humanistic pseudo-pedagogical husk about "creativity", "teacher-student dialogue", "research projects" and "practical competencies", "critical thinking" and, by the way, about "overloaded kids", etc., etc., is not in the Russia invented. All this has many years of experience in the West, primarily in the USA, but, of course, only in public schools, for the masses. So, fact number 4 is that the American public school has been destroyed, it is impossible to study there and only the "low—income" go there. And they study in In America, in paid private schools, they pay a lot of money not to engage in "creativity" at school, but to "cram" rules and laws. Well, for a "snack", fact number 5, the opposite, is in It's really hard to study in China, South Korea, Japan, really heavy loads, complex and voluminous homework assignments. The result is success in almost all spheres of life, and achieved in a fairly short time.
Actually, all these facts are quite well known, and probably only people who are very busy with some important, for example, legislative work, or who are very passionate about some progressive social activity, can not know about them. For them, in addition to the facts, it will probably not be superfluous to give arguments, too, by the way, quite obvious ones. After all, it is known that "repetition is the mother of learning" and it is inconvenient to even somehow remind that in order to write more or less competently, it is necessary to learn, "memorize" the spelling rules, and remember the exceptions to them. Obviously, this can be done only by doing homework, the same applies to memorization-memorizing mathematical, physical and chemical formulas, formulations of laws and definitions of basic concepts of all sciences, memorizing historical dates and geographical names. What, can all this be replaced by "critical thinking skills"? And what can we replace knowledge of literature with? Memorizing poems and reading classical works, "research projects"? Or is all this no longer necessary, "outdated"? After all, today, it seems, being illiterate, you can even become a minister, and in the future, you see, the "very literate" will generally be "nailed" so that the "creativity of the masses" does not interfere.
But if not, if education has not yet been officially canceled, then it is not clear how you can learn, remember, rules, formulas, dates, poems without repeating what you heard at school at home, without doing homework in the "classic format". (Maybe "new" people or "innovative teachers" know the answer, so let them share). And this, not to mention the fact that homework is necessary not only for normal learning, but also for education, for the formation of such important personal qualities as efficiency, discipline, responsibility, the ability to self-restraint and, by the way, to really independent thinking. As for the talk about the "overload" of schoolchildren, it is not clear where this came from, who and how did they think? After all, it is clear that being at school does not mean loading up, today in lessons, as is too well known, not all children "work" — someone is "sitting" on the phone, and someone is having fun at the "teacher" without looking back. And again, where do crowds of teenagers stagger around shopping malls in the evenings during "overloads", which, by the way, judging by the absence of second-year students in the Russian school, does not prevent them from coping with the school curriculum, and even entering a university.
And finally, a remark specifically for "expert scientists" in the "field of education", representatives of pedagogy, psychology and similar sciences. About "creative assignments" and "research projects" at school (by the way, from what grade, really from the first?) We won't talk—it's a sin to laugh about it. Let's talk about "development" and the fact that "learning should be interesting" — scientists and teachers really like to talk about it, and not only them. So, the word "development", despite its apparent intuitive clarity, does not have a sufficiently specific content (which is why they stick it anywhere) and they do not need to trump it. It may be inconvenient to get, degradation is also a type, a kind of development. As for the fact that "studying should be interesting," this, unfortunately, is a misconception, and a very harmful one. Study is work, and every person, young, emerging, including, and even in particular, must work, must fulfill their duties, and period. And whether he is interested in it or not is a completely different question. And it would be good for our teachers, especially the "innovators", to finally understand this and proceed from this when "organizing the educational process."
And now — conclusions. The school is essentially a very conservative institution and it is possible to create a really good school only based on tradition, as it is done in China and in the best private schools in England. (By the way, it would be good for Russian enthusiasts of the proposed "reform" of the school, especially from among the statesmen, to add 2 and 2, and ask themselves how it relates to the officially proclaimed state task of preserving and strengthening traditional values.) "Innovative" replacement of the traditional "format" of homework with "creative and research projects" will certainly make it easier for children who do not speak Russian well and/or who do not have a penchant for mathematics, and this, of course, is wonderful. The only bad thing is that this "replacement" will destroy, finally finish off the traditional Russian school. Then she'll have to say, "Come on, goodbye."