On Sept. 19, 2008, the Znannia Society, Ukraine’s largest scholarly-educational organization, celebrated its 60th anniversary. Founded in Soviet times, this organization was responsible for disseminating ideological propaganda, in addition to fulfilling its main educational function. It was generously funded, and the best conditions were created for its members.
In November 1990 the Extraordinary 12th Congress of the Znannia Society of the Ukrainian SSR voted to transform itself into the Znannia Society of Ukraine. Since then, many things have changed in our society. No longer a government organization, it now has to struggle for survival, just like other associations in Ukraine.
And when we say struggle, we mean struggle. For many years the society’s board has had no respite from raiders who have set their eyes on the property Znannia inherited from the Soviet Union. The Ukrainian government is not doing anything to help, and this state of affairs is symptomatic of the overall attitude to the strategically vital areas of knowledge and science.
What has Znannia achieved thus far, and what problems is it facing today? What is the current state of Ukrainian education and science? The Day asked Academician Vasyl Kremin, the president of the Znannia Society, to answer these questions.
In Soviet times the Znannia Society was a powerful structure and had a solid reputation in scientific and educational circles. Dr. Kremin, what is the situation today? Has Znannia preserved its prestige?
“It is true that in the Soviet era Znannia was a mighty administrative structure in our country. Many factors contributed to this, in particular, the government’s support and the involvement of prominent scholars, academicians, professors, local intelligentsia, and teachers. An additional bonus was that the organization had serious financial resources provided either directly by the state or labor collectives. Znannia used these funds to hold lectures and carry out publishing activity.
“Today the society is somewhat different. It has no political or ideological affiliation and does not serve the interests of any political party. We are committed to a state-oriented policy of creating a civil society, fostering democracy and national identity, and developing individual potential in our country. However, we do not receive any support from the state. On the contrary, we are experiencing problems because certain raiders are trying to divest us of our property, in particular, the Znannia Society’s hotel over which we have been fighting for a long time. We will not give up, and if our national legislation is not capable of settling this issue, we will have to appeal to the European Court for justice.
“Znannia has definitely scaled down its activities compared to the previous decades. However, we have branches in every oblast, and there are raion offices in a number of oblasts, which means that our network has mostly been preserved. The people who work in Znannia are committed to educational activity and are fairly active.
“The range of our activities has greatly expanded since Soviet times. In addition to giving lectures, we now have a network of structures offering educational tourism services. We have a center for European and NATO integration, which in 2007 published over a dozen brochures on these topics, a Ukrainian Studies center, and the University of Contemporary Knowledge. This institution of higher education was founded by Znannia and now has 10 branches in Ukraine in addition to its headquarters in Kyiv. We actively participate in the Kadry Program in the framework of which we won a tender and trained a large number of specialists.”
You mentioned that Znannia does not receive any funding from the state. Where does the money come from to support the society?
“Znannia is completely self-financed. First, we charge for nearly all the services that I just mentioned, but the fees are affordable. We have won tenders to carry out educational activities on European and NATO integration and train members of election commissions. We also have certain facilities left over from Soviet times. Some of these are leased, and these funds are used to finance our main activities. We are forced to appeal to local administrations and councils, asking them to involve our oblast branches in educational and explanatory activities on the local level. In some oblasts the local authorities have accepted the invitation, and they partially cover the cost of our services.”
As someone who has worked in the education system for many years, what is your assessment of the current state of Ukraine’s education system? How well is it meeting contemporary challenges and the demands of the labor market?
“I deeply respect both the past and the present of our system of education. I do not want all of us educators to don sackcloth and pour ashes over ourselves by negating all the achievements of Ukrainian education. This is an unfair critical stance that is offensive to hundreds of thousands of educators in our country. On the other hand, I clearly realize that the present-day education system falls short of meeting the needs of individuals, society, and the state. The solution is not to revert to the previous system-that type of education was good for a different society and a different type of industrial production. Today, when the world is transitioning to the age of information technology and our country is switching to another type of social relations, to have an education from the past means letting the country lag and fossilizing it in the 20th century. We should not let this happen. Moreover, the 21st century is making new demands on people themselves. Education also needs to change with a view to training competitive individuals. Let me tell you what I mean by this.
“There are several general directions for reforming education. People will now be entering life in conditions where the environment is changing extremely quickly: engineering, technology, knowledge, information, interpersonal relationships, etc. In other words, humanity is embarking on an innovative type of progress, and we need to educate innovative individuals in terms of their thinking, culture, innovative activities, and the ability to change themselves and create innovative changes.
“Second, we have to prepare individuals who will put their knowledge to practical use. This is a weak point in our education: we absolutize its knowledge acquisition function, which is undoubtedly important, but we undervalue at least two other functions: teaching individuals how to learn and acquire skills throughout their lives, and how to apply their knowledge in professional or public activities, everyday life, etc. Students often acquire knowledge in order to get good marks on exams, rather than to use it as the methodological foundation of human behavior.
“In this respect I welcome entrance tests – as a matter of fact, experimental tests were launched when I was the Minister of Education. However, these efforts need to be stepped up. When we adopted the resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers in 2004, we expected that schools would incorporate testing. After five or six topics, a teacher would give students a test, and then they would know that they have to study in a systematic fashion and get used to the testing system. What is happening now is that a high school graduate first experiences testing at the decisive moment in his or her academic life.
“Perhaps, our society has not fully grasped the fact that individuals are in a totally different communicative environment-they are in constant interactive contact with others. In any case, we need to respond adequately to these contacts in order to retain our own identity, and, furthermore, be successful in our lives and our activities. Therefore, we need to prepare self-sufficient individuals who are capable of consciously perceiving their environment and consciously constructing their philosophy of life.
“As soon as possible, we need to put an end to authoritarian and repressive teaching methods by replacing them with cooperative pedagogy, which is marked by tolerance. We do not need schools that keep students for 12 years under authoritarian conditions, thus producing proponents of authoritarian, or even totalitarian, values.
“Education has to be child-centered; it must raise children according to their individual abilities as closely as possible. We need to help children learn about themselves and develop on their own so that they can fully realize themselves upon reaching maturity. Then individuals will be happy and society will develop dynamically. So it is very important now to get ready to introduce specialized education in high schools. I support the creation of specialized lyceums.
“We need to shape globalistic individuals who are capable of living in a globalized world. This has to be reflected in a range of things: from awareness of the world to foreign language proficiency. We need a linguistic breakthrough in our education: a command of three foreign languages has to be the standard for each high school graduate.
“Finally, we are responsible for the system of values with which students graduate from school. If they have internalized the values of the past, they will be constrained by them in their adult years. We need to teach students to be self-sufficient, successful, and prosperous-but in an honest way, not like most of the rich in our country. We have to teach students to be patriots because what is happening concurrently with globalization processes today is that nations are competing on a world scale. Only states that unite their people will be able to defend their national interests to the greatest possible extent.”
