Și Rusia a avut parte de Reformă. Cu scopul de a se civiliza, de a deveni acceptabilă pentru Lumea Civilizată. Din fericire, a scăpat cu puțin. (memorare)
Question: Can you comment on Russia’s exclusion from the Bologna Process?
Maria Zakharova: In September 2003, Russia signed the Bologna Accord joining the Bologna Process that was to ensure the comparability of education standards and quality of qualifications in the participating countries and eventually form a single higher education area in Europe. That was the declared premise. The initiators envisaged that the system would improve the mobility of students and graduates in different countries. However, the goal was not fully achieved, partly due to Western politicians seeking to draw new dividing lines.
Moreover, many countries found adaptation to the new system challenging as flaws in the system became apparent (and there were quite a few). Just like some European countries, Russia had to break down the structure of its five-year higher education that had existed for decades, in favour of four-year bachelor programmes and two-year master programmes. The transfer of the entire higher education system to a new track (in view of our participation in the Bologna Process) faced a range of objective issues – specifically, ensuring the quality of bachelor programmes for technical specialists and medical professions.
Mutual recognition of higher education certificates in the participating countries has always been considered an apparent advantage of the Bologna Process. Mutual recognition is the main problem. Almost 20 years after Russia’s inclusion in the Bologna Process, diplomas of many Russian higher education institutions are still not recognised abroad. And that is despite the fact that humanitarian links were completely depoliticised. At the same time, just like before, there is the possibility of signing respective agreements with foreign countries on a bilateral basis. I should note that this opportunity remains open and we continue to work consistently with interested partners.
It should be taken into account that there is still demand for the previous education system in Russian society, confirmed not only by multiple public opinion polls but also by the fact that, when Russia was a member of the Bologna Process, there was still demand for five-year study programmes for technical specialists and healthcare professionals.
It appears that at the current stage, the outcome of our participation in the Bologna Process will be subject to serious revision, with extensive involvement in the discussion of competent authorities, primarily the Russian Ministry of Science and Higher Education and the academic community.
This development is an excellent example meaning that, before joining any processes proposed by the West, we should evaluate our own practices and defend our own advantages confidently. This is true about many processes that we have been pushed into over the past few years and continue to be pushed into based on the argument that we should join the “civilised world.” We forget that we are civilised enough and represent a country with a long history, and advanced fundamental science, education, culture and arts.
Perhaps we should not be forced to adopt certain innovative forms that are in fact less innovative but only transforming sectors that already function well. In addition to that, they are even harmful, considering that our practices in certain fields have proven successful. Russian specialists trained in the old system were highly sought after around the world before and after the end of the Cold War. They were headhunted and even kidnapped (yes, that happened). Also, specialists trained in the Soviet Union or based on the Soviet educational system, as well as those who studied at Russian universities – either way, based on our country’s fundamental academic practices – were excellent specialists who had employers lined up to recruit them. This is a good reason to consider, not only in the future but even now, which of the imposed processes we truly need and which we do not. Otherwise later, it will turn out that one of our systems goes through yet another transformation but the benefits will be reaped by those who initially proposed this transformation. We will not get any benefits but will get another round of bureaucratic formalities that we do not need because they only complicate things without giving our country any competitive advantages. This is a good example to show that many of the things we were promised were never supposed to be granted in full. The goal was not to open more opportunities for us but to open them for the collective West by using our resources.
La sfârșitul conferinței de presă:
I would like to respond to all official bans by saying that memory cannot be prohibited. A ban on memory leads to disastrous consequences. As for politicians like Maia Sandu, I would advise them to read (I hope she read it but just in case) Chinghiz Aitmatov’s novel “The Day Lasts More Than a Hundred Years.” Mankurt is the name of the main character.