The Beginning of a Scientific Career (Part 5)
So, as promised, let's take a step back and talk about the "Bologna" magistracy. I happened to learn this system from the good side; I can’t promise that it is implemented exactly in every university. But I think that my experience should be more like a norm, rather than something non-standard.
I just want to urge to abandon discussions about the scientific quality of a particular type of education. We will discuss only social aspects, that is, the attractiveness of the Bologna system for the student. As for the quality, I will try to speak softly. Education systems as programming languages. If at least one was obviously better than others, there would be no others. Yes, maybe the Bologna system is a little better, and maybe a little worse (in scientific terms). However, social aspects are equally important. As I have already said, it is probably scientifically better to lock a young specialist in a sharashka, and let him invent. And then distracted, you see, on beer and ladies. Therefore, I put the question differently: in which system a person feels most comfortable and at the same time receives a sufficiently high-quality education. And here my sympathies are wholly on the side of “Bologna” education, the features of which will be discussed below.
Free choice of courses
')
On any program there is a mandatory set of courses. Like us. But their number is trying to significantly limit. In my opinion, compulsory courses constitute no more than 20-30% of the student’s curriculum. When choosing any course, a student must take into account: (a) compliance with the program (it is impossible to take botany into account computer science); (b) Compliance with the level of difficulty (you cannot take a course in C as a master’s - this is a bachelor’s course). Sometimes a system of "pre-requirements" is practiced. For example, a teacher may indicate that in order to complete his course, you must first complete such and such courses. This is usually done informally, that is, there is no task to take a specific course at a particular university. Simply stated: to complete the course X you need to own the material of the course Y in the following program (here is a link to the home page of the course).
This is a "form." Now let's talk about the content, that is, about ambiguous moments. Most of all, they criticize the possibility of obtaining the degree of a “Bologna” master and at the same time not owning completely some basic things that were not included in the compulsory program. I tend to agree with this opinion. But I think that there is no need to exhibit students as idiots. If a student sets the task to get a diploma at the lowest cost, he will be able to do it both in the western and in the Russian system. If the task is to learn something, you can correctly approach the choice of courses. To do this, there are "tutors" and curators, designed to solve problems arising from students. In the end, you can informally communicate with any professor. From personal experience - contact between a professor and a student in the West is closer. Ask for help to decide on the selection of courses is quite acceptable.
On the other hand, the version with the “wise guidance lowered from above” program works only in theory. In practice, “wise leadership” does not always care about the quality of education. Such is life, and nothing can be done about it. I personally faced a huge number of situations when students (in Russia) were given completely “left” courses solely for political reasons. Suppose once all the polls tried to make physicists in the field of rocket science. Now, objectively, the need for specialists in missiles has decreased, but, let's say, programming would be a good idea to pull up. But the leadership can not dismiss teachers of physics of missiles and hire new employees. Therefore, they either put physicists into programming (in which they don’t understand a damn thing), or they spit on the true needs of students and force them to listen to a subject that is completely unrelated to their specialty. The learning process is becoming more formal. In fact, everything is done "for show". The teacher who leads the rocket physics to programmers is well aware that they don’t need this subject, and often sets off tests for everyone without too much difficulty. Students, respectively, in the same way "slaughter" on the subject. It also happens this way: a student at the exam starts drawing money, explaining to a teacher of continuum mechanics that his subject will never be useful to this student, for he is going to do in life, say, mathematical models in economics. The teacher here can (fairly) get into position and put a test. But, of course, on the whole, such a system is incredibly dampening.
If the student himself is responsible for choosing the subject, whining in the standings will not help. Chose an item - if you please pass it. And if you do not pass - it does not matter, in the end, try again. But it was not possible even after several attempts - also not fatally, choose another object and hand it over. In a “rigid” system, the failure of a single, single tertiary subject means automatic dismissal (at least in theory). I do not think that a life in which any session can strike a heavy blow contributes to the enjoyment of the educational process.
Thus, the “free” system, firstly, greatly reduces stress. Any item can be redeemed several times (although, as far as I know, in Germany with this more severely) or to abandon it altogether. Secondly, the mention of the course passed in the diploma makes us believe that the student really knows this course, and not just “completed” it. For "free then" will not be rated. This is simply not necessary.
Written exams
Perhaps this is not entirely true of the Bologna system, but the absolute majority of the exams held are written. Oral exams are also practiced, but much less frequently. It seems to me that, in most cases, oral examinations are bad, because they offer an incredible scope for all sorts of bribes, settling bills and other abominations. A student sat down with a teacher, they talked about something there - and ends in the water. What was asked, what answered - yes, who knows them now?
The written exam is not a test. This is something like a school quiz. Theoretical questions, practical tasks are given. Roughly speaking, one ticket for the whole group. And students sit, paint the theory, solve problems. Then work for a couple of weeks is checked, and the results are reported. The scoring algorithm is known in advance, and if a student considers his assessment unfair, he can always appeal by presenting written evidence of his rightness (examination paper). Similarly, if a student demands an undeservedly high mark, the teacher can always prove his point.
Exam papers usually cover the course material well. The exam (that is, the student writing a “ticket”) may take several hours. Again, given the inconvenience of most courses, exams are conducted with all rigor. Any attempt to cheat is stopped extremely hard. This is considered to be a violation of the academic “code of honor”, ​​for which you can get into the conversation with the authorities first, and then finish playing to the deduction.
Yes, another aspect. At least, we have paid a lot of attention to the ability of students to demonstrate their achievements. For example, all students are divided into groups of three or four people. Each group is given a task ("project"). Implementation of the project involves some simple research, programming and display of results. A show usually involves the presentation of your project before other students, for example, using PowerPoint. From personal experience: our (Russian) students have this useful skill not very developed.
Freedom of movement
Abroad, in general, are very fond of all sorts of cooperation, travel, exchanges. It is considered normal if a professor goes to a semester or work for another university for a year. Short-term visits (from one day to a week) of employees are generally routine. Students, too, are not forbidden to see the world, although it is somewhat more difficult :)
Anyway, everything again comes down to the task of free choice of courses. If a student has looked at something interesting in a foreign university, he is free to negotiate with the local professor about enrolling himself in the course. If successful, points for the course will be credited to the student in the main program. Some teachers have nothing against distance learning. In this case, it is quite possible “without departing from the cash register” to get points from some non-resident or foreign university.
For those who doubt the quality of “external” courses, let me remind you that all the details (where the course was listened to and who the teacher is) are included in the Diploma Supplement. So the student’s “educational history” is always open and accessible.
Student exchange (go somewhere for a semester or a year) - a bit more complicated, but also widely practiced. I myself have never delved into the details (it was not necessary), but there are exchange programs, such as Erasmus , which provide grants for traveling abroad. To me personally, this seems like a tremendous boon. A person who has lived abroad, "turned around" among peers from other countries, gains invaluable experience in communication. First, he gets rid of a heap of idiotic stereotypes, alas, taking place in the world (and flourishing magnificently in our country). Secondly, he establishes contacts, especially useful in further scientific careers, meets with countries and universities. Needless to say that outside the framework of free choice of courses such trips would be difficult? ..
On this, perhaps, finish. Next time I plan to talk about the end of graduate school and on further scenarios.
UPD : More details about the features of education in Germany
I just want to urge to abandon discussions about the scientific quality of a particular type of education. We will discuss only social aspects, that is, the attractiveness of the Bologna system for the student. As for the quality, I will try to speak softly. Education systems as programming languages. If at least one was obviously better than others, there would be no others. Yes, maybe the Bologna system is a little better, and maybe a little worse (in scientific terms). However, social aspects are equally important. As I have already said, it is probably scientifically better to lock a young specialist in a sharashka, and let him invent. And then distracted, you see, on beer and ladies. Therefore, I put the question differently: in which system a person feels most comfortable and at the same time receives a sufficiently high-quality education. And here my sympathies are wholly on the side of “Bologna” education, the features of which will be discussed below.
Free choice of courses
')
On any program there is a mandatory set of courses. Like us. But their number is trying to significantly limit. In my opinion, compulsory courses constitute no more than 20-30% of the student’s curriculum. When choosing any course, a student must take into account: (a) compliance with the program (it is impossible to take botany into account computer science); (b) Compliance with the level of difficulty (you cannot take a course in C as a master’s - this is a bachelor’s course). Sometimes a system of "pre-requirements" is practiced. For example, a teacher may indicate that in order to complete his course, you must first complete such and such courses. This is usually done informally, that is, there is no task to take a specific course at a particular university. Simply stated: to complete the course X you need to own the material of the course Y in the following program (here is a link to the home page of the course).
This is a "form." Now let's talk about the content, that is, about ambiguous moments. Most of all, they criticize the possibility of obtaining the degree of a “Bologna” master and at the same time not owning completely some basic things that were not included in the compulsory program. I tend to agree with this opinion. But I think that there is no need to exhibit students as idiots. If a student sets the task to get a diploma at the lowest cost, he will be able to do it both in the western and in the Russian system. If the task is to learn something, you can correctly approach the choice of courses. To do this, there are "tutors" and curators, designed to solve problems arising from students. In the end, you can informally communicate with any professor. From personal experience - contact between a professor and a student in the West is closer. Ask for help to decide on the selection of courses is quite acceptable.
On the other hand, the version with the “wise guidance lowered from above” program works only in theory. In practice, “wise leadership” does not always care about the quality of education. Such is life, and nothing can be done about it. I personally faced a huge number of situations when students (in Russia) were given completely “left” courses solely for political reasons. Suppose once all the polls tried to make physicists in the field of rocket science. Now, objectively, the need for specialists in missiles has decreased, but, let's say, programming would be a good idea to pull up. But the leadership can not dismiss teachers of physics of missiles and hire new employees. Therefore, they either put physicists into programming (in which they don’t understand a damn thing), or they spit on the true needs of students and force them to listen to a subject that is completely unrelated to their specialty. The learning process is becoming more formal. In fact, everything is done "for show". The teacher who leads the rocket physics to programmers is well aware that they don’t need this subject, and often sets off tests for everyone without too much difficulty. Students, respectively, in the same way "slaughter" on the subject. It also happens this way: a student at the exam starts drawing money, explaining to a teacher of continuum mechanics that his subject will never be useful to this student, for he is going to do in life, say, mathematical models in economics. The teacher here can (fairly) get into position and put a test. But, of course, on the whole, such a system is incredibly dampening.
If the student himself is responsible for choosing the subject, whining in the standings will not help. Chose an item - if you please pass it. And if you do not pass - it does not matter, in the end, try again. But it was not possible even after several attempts - also not fatally, choose another object and hand it over. In a “rigid” system, the failure of a single, single tertiary subject means automatic dismissal (at least in theory). I do not think that a life in which any session can strike a heavy blow contributes to the enjoyment of the educational process.
Thus, the “free” system, firstly, greatly reduces stress. Any item can be redeemed several times (although, as far as I know, in Germany with this more severely) or to abandon it altogether. Secondly, the mention of the course passed in the diploma makes us believe that the student really knows this course, and not just “completed” it. For "free then" will not be rated. This is simply not necessary.
Written exams
Perhaps this is not entirely true of the Bologna system, but the absolute majority of the exams held are written. Oral exams are also practiced, but much less frequently. It seems to me that, in most cases, oral examinations are bad, because they offer an incredible scope for all sorts of bribes, settling bills and other abominations. A student sat down with a teacher, they talked about something there - and ends in the water. What was asked, what answered - yes, who knows them now?
The written exam is not a test. This is something like a school quiz. Theoretical questions, practical tasks are given. Roughly speaking, one ticket for the whole group. And students sit, paint the theory, solve problems. Then work for a couple of weeks is checked, and the results are reported. The scoring algorithm is known in advance, and if a student considers his assessment unfair, he can always appeal by presenting written evidence of his rightness (examination paper). Similarly, if a student demands an undeservedly high mark, the teacher can always prove his point.
Exam papers usually cover the course material well. The exam (that is, the student writing a “ticket”) may take several hours. Again, given the inconvenience of most courses, exams are conducted with all rigor. Any attempt to cheat is stopped extremely hard. This is considered to be a violation of the academic “code of honor”, ​​for which you can get into the conversation with the authorities first, and then finish playing to the deduction.
Yes, another aspect. At least, we have paid a lot of attention to the ability of students to demonstrate their achievements. For example, all students are divided into groups of three or four people. Each group is given a task ("project"). Implementation of the project involves some simple research, programming and display of results. A show usually involves the presentation of your project before other students, for example, using PowerPoint. From personal experience: our (Russian) students have this useful skill not very developed.
Freedom of movement
Abroad, in general, are very fond of all sorts of cooperation, travel, exchanges. It is considered normal if a professor goes to a semester or work for another university for a year. Short-term visits (from one day to a week) of employees are generally routine. Students, too, are not forbidden to see the world, although it is somewhat more difficult :)
Anyway, everything again comes down to the task of free choice of courses. If a student has looked at something interesting in a foreign university, he is free to negotiate with the local professor about enrolling himself in the course. If successful, points for the course will be credited to the student in the main program. Some teachers have nothing against distance learning. In this case, it is quite possible “without departing from the cash register” to get points from some non-resident or foreign university.
For those who doubt the quality of “external” courses, let me remind you that all the details (where the course was listened to and who the teacher is) are included in the Diploma Supplement. So the student’s “educational history” is always open and accessible.
Student exchange (go somewhere for a semester or a year) - a bit more complicated, but also widely practiced. I myself have never delved into the details (it was not necessary), but there are exchange programs, such as Erasmus , which provide grants for traveling abroad. To me personally, this seems like a tremendous boon. A person who has lived abroad, "turned around" among peers from other countries, gains invaluable experience in communication. First, he gets rid of a heap of idiotic stereotypes, alas, taking place in the world (and flourishing magnificently in our country). Secondly, he establishes contacts, especially useful in further scientific careers, meets with countries and universities. Needless to say that outside the framework of free choice of courses such trips would be difficult? ..
On this, perhaps, finish. Next time I plan to talk about the end of graduate school and on further scenarios.
UPD : More details about the features of education in Germany
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/51390/
All Articles