Education in the Soviet Union

Teaching methods

• Soviet education aimed to develop real understanding & competence, not just basic literacy or rote learning. 
• Deana Levin’s Children in Soviet Russia (1942) describes her experience teaching in Moscow (1938-42) at an English-medium Soviet school, which followed the same syllabus & discipline as other Soviet schools. 
• High educational standards were enforced through collective support rather than blame.  Poor work was identified & remedied via training, not blame or humiliation. 
• Teachers observed each other’s lessons freely; parents also had the right to observe classes.  This system ensured poor teaching was quickly identified & corrected. 
• Students participated in discussions about teaching quality.  Inadequate teaching was openly addressed with input from students, teachers, & class leaders. 
• Example: A poorly disciplined botany class led to intervention.  Levin interviewed the pupils to identify weaknesses with the teacher present, then worked with the teacher to redesign lessons & monitored progress, leading to improved discipline & learning outcomes. 
• Discipline was not about submission to authority: students respected rules not as teacher-imposed oppression, but as necessary for collective learning, and essential for their collective success.  Socialist competition between classes fostered discipline, enthusiasm & mutual respect. 
• Students played an active role in school governance. 
• Teachers were supported by colleagues, headteachers, & trade union committees to address instructional problems collaboratively. 
• Teachers were responsible for improving student understanding & sought collective solutions when students struggled. 
• Out-of-class activities, including Pioneer organizations & special-interest circles (eg, drama, science, music), were seen as important for developing social & cultural skills. 
• Large class sizes (42 in lower classes, 30 in upper classes), so the system prioritized student engagement through active homework review & public assessment. 
• Regular assessment ensured children stayed on track, with failure attributed to inadequate teaching, not student weakness
• No streaming or setting: All students followed the same curriculum, & abler pupils were expected to assist those struggling. 

The role of parents

• Parents were actively involved in school life through committees & regular meetings. 
• Each school had a parents’ committee to help organize events, monitor school performance, & assist in maintaining discipline. 
• Parents could observe classes, discuss their child’s progress with teachers, & were required to sign homework diaries. 
• Teachers conducted home visits to understand students’ personal circumstances & offer support. 
• If parents neglected their duties, factory committees could intervene, ensuring collective responsibility for a child’s education. 
• Community pressure encouraged parental involvement, with more formal interventions if issues persisted. 
• The system aimed to integrate the efforts of teachers, parents, & wider society to ensure every child’s educational success & moral development.