Transcript of the meeting:

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, friends!

As you know, we’ve arranged for this meeting to take place a day before the Government Presidium meeting in which we will approve a new federal targeted programme for education. The ministry has been working on it for a long time: it is a large document and we will discuss it today. However, before we discuss business, I would like to congratulate Mikhail Sluch, the headmaster of this school, and the entire school collective, both teachers and pupils. Why? Because when a leader makes progress in such a field, it is undoubtedly the success of the entire group, but of course the headmaster has a lot to do with it. Mr Sluch told us today during a brief tour of the school that he started his career here in 1992 when the school was in complete disarray. He put things in order here, so that the next school year could begin on the first of September. And he has been working here ever since – first as a teacher, and since 2005 he has been working as the headmaster. Is that correct?

Mikhail Sluch: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: And this year he has been named the Teacher of the Year.

I have just walked around the school and had a look. Of course, in terms of equipment and resources, it is an ordinary school, but the teaching here is far from ordinary. Mr Sluch, I want to say that I am impressed by how the learning process has been constructed here – with care and skill. I would also like to express my thanks to the jury, which has taken the selection process very seriously. You truly deserve the Crystal Pelican, which symbolises your devotion to your work, which is critical for the country and its future. 

Congratulations, Mr Sluch. I am pleased to present you with the Pelican.

Now let’s turn to the business on today’s agenda. As I’ve said, tomorrow at the Government Presidium meeting, we will consider a new federal programme on education. It is comprehensive and affects all the areas of your line of work – education. As you know, steps have been taken lately to develop the education system as part of the national project Education. I think that a great deal has been done.

However, whenever there is a large-scale project, there are typically more problems that we haven’t solved than ones that we have. This is to be expected. It is a natural part of the process. In higher education, we are counting on the strong, and I believe that it is the proper approach. We are setting up a network of national federal universities and research universities, and will earmark additional funding for them.

For secondary schools, we have adopted a system of grants and we’re supporting schools that introduce innovative teaching methods. Your school has been awarded a grant of one million roubles, if I remember correctly.

Remark: In 2007.

Vladimir Putin: This will help you purchase some additional equipment for the school and develop some new teaching programmes. Honestly, it was a real pleasure to see how the learning process is organised at your school. It is inspired. Brilliant is the only word to describe it. Simply brilliant! Even I found it interesting, and the children obviously do, too. I can see how engaged the children are. You make learning a game – a useful and interesting game. These kinds of teaching methods, these techniques must be supported.

Joining our conversation today is the trade union chair. I hope that you, Ms Merkulova (turning to Galina Merkulova, chair of the union of educational and research workers), will also share your opinion on the current situation and the plans that we have already formulated, which are to be implemented under various programmes. I have mentioned the federal targeted programme. This federal programme provides over 130 billion roubles in funding – 157 billion, I think, 53 billion of which will come from the federal budget. And 10.5 billion roubles are earmarked for secondary schools.

Naturally, we can’t forget about social issues, such as teacher pay, particularly per capita financing, which we’ve been talking about a lot in recent years. Whenever and wherever this system is introduced, it results in higher pay for teachers. Still, I know that unions have their own perspective on this matter, so I have invited you, Ms Merkulova, so that I can hear your position. However, in Omsk, Pskov and Kaliningrad we are seeing salaries go up by about 25%, and in some cases by 40%.

Moscow has not taken part in these experiments yet, but Mr Sobyanin (Sergei Sobyanin, mayor of Moscow) did this when he was governor of the Tyumen Region. How much did teachers’ salaries go up then, Mr Sobyanin?

Sergey Sobyanin: 50%.

Vladimir Putin: There you go! Teachers’ salaries went up 50%. By transitioning to new methods of financial management, it becomes possible not only to independently dispose of financial resources and use them to raise salaries, but also to take decisions as to how much money should be allocated and for what in order to develop the educational system. So I repeat: we must discuss all of this carefully before the final decision is taken. And this is all that I want to say for now. I would like to give the floor to Mr Sluch, as the headmaster of the school we are in now, and then I would like us to have a broader discussion on all the problems that I’ve mentioned.

I just want to add that a new draft law on education is being prepared in addition to the targeted programme, which we plan to approve at the next Government Presidium meeting. The draft law must also be discussed in an open and transparent manner. And, in general, the article and the amendments to the legislation, which we are preparing now, include a clause stipulating maximum transparency in the education process, exactly what you have done here, Mr Sluch. I’ve seen how you post an individual student’s academic progress on the Internet, and how this reveals how the student is doing and what is being done at the family level, as well as how well the teacher is performing. It seems to me that this experience is very helpful. We are planning to incorporate what you are doing here into the law.  Let’s begin the discussion.

Mr Sluch, you have the floor.

Mikhail Sluch: Thank you, Mr Putin. One aspect of this is very important, in my opinion. You noticed it and mentioned it when were taking the tour around the school and talking to the pupils. It is very important that this school be open. This is a significant resource for us. To my mind, it’s not a coincidence that this is not a meeting for teachers only or for trade unions, despite the presence of the distinguished trade union representatives. This joint discussion includes parents, too, because this system of joint government and public management is a crucial institution of our civil society, an important element of which is openness. I’m referring to information being open and schools being open to parents. School is not only an educational institution but also a cultural centre, where parents often gain as much as their children do. Parents might be interested in more than just supporting the school financially.  Schools have relatively few teachers. There are many more parents of pupils, and this is important…

Vladimir Putin: I believe that what Mr Sluch managed to achieve is great. He got parents involved in the learning process and the day-to-day life of the school. This is interesting and very useful. You managed to create a sort of large family…

Mikhail Sluch: Yes, we did in some respects, but you can never solve all the problems in a school, including problems related to occupational guidance. Behind every engaged pupil, you find a teacher, yes, but also a good parent who can contribute to the pupil’s education. And this does not necessarily have to be the pupil’s parent, so the circle of people with an interest in the pupil’s success is much wider. I believe that the format of government and public management and the governing board may provide a fresh perspective on issues that are currently under development, including those related to the federal target programme, and issues of per capita financing – how schools are receiving funding and how it is then distributed within schools. In addition to objective criteria for evaluating teachers’ work, it is very important to know what the customers think – to listen to what the parents have to say. Naturally, there are complex and very sensitive issues, often with an ethical dimension, for example, people’s likes and dislikes. But in general, it is important that the customers in the education system take an interest in the teachers’ work.

Another related issue that is being discussed now is the transition to the new compensation system in education. We all know that teachers in Moscow are currently paid decent wages, and Sergei Sobyanin can attest to this. But we have to bear in mind all available means of incentivising teachers, which you’ve already mentioned. If a teacher is committed to his job and does good work, we can call him a distinguished teacher and we create certain incentives for him. However, it is also useful to search for other more flexible mechanisms, including those involving parents.

Finally, another interesting project, in my opinion, is the so-called federal law No. 83 on budget-funded autonomous institutions. It will create development opportunities for schools, but there are naturally concerns and risks as to how this project will be implemented and what problems may arise.

Vladimir Putin: It is crucial that each person involved in our large education understands this – the decisions that will be taken and what they will lead to in practice.

Mikhail Sluch: The format of this meeting allows not only professionals and high-level administrators to speak about these problems. It also provides an opportunity for the parents to hear about them. I believe this is very important, and I’m grateful to you for agreeing to have this conversation and for your willingness to discuss these important issues.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you, Mr Sluch. I see you’ve made a good choice for chair of the parent organisation – a department head at Deutsche Bank … Mr Sluch is a very talented man.

Mikhail Sluch: Mr Tomlyanovich looks young…

Vladimir Putin: Yes, and he has a good position.

Mikhail Sluch: His oldest son is a graduate of this school, so he already has 12-years experience at this school as a parent. 

Stepan Tomlyanovich: 13 years, actually

Mikhail Sluch: 13 even.

Stepan Tomlyanovich: Now my daughter is in the graduating class. I have been pursuing a career in business in parallel with my job as a parent. We are very happy to support this school and the creative learning process used here. We are very pleased that the enthusiasm of its teachers has found support at the government level. At any rate, the financial survival of our favourite teachers has ceased to be an urgent issue.

Now we can discuss much more meaningful and important questions – how to develop administration and self-administration in the school with a view toward the future. I hope all parents will agree with me that as parents and customers, to use Mr Sluch’s term, we see our goal in giving as much support as possible to the teachers. We must relieve them of organisational burdens and other functions outside of teaching, and allow them to focus on teaching as much as possible, on working with children.

In this context, the parents have traditionally played a major role in our school. We are trying to help teachers organise events, including some with the help of our school board, and in resolving organisational and financial issues where necessary.

I think that this is also very important for the parents, because all of us have different experience and different circumstances. Some parents are well-versed in business management, but not many. Therefore, it is also very important for us as parents to take a responsible attitude to our children’s academic progress. We shouldn’t think that we have sent them to school for 12 years and received educated adults in 12 years. This is an interactive process and we are trying to take part in it. As parents, we are trying to understand its specific features, what should be done, what the short-term requirements of funding salaries are, and what part of funds should be allocated for capital improvements and training for teachers.

I think there will be a lot of discussion about this today, because educating a good teacher is probably the best long-term investment you can make. This task is very time-consuming. Our legislation is moving in the right direction. It allows educational institutions to develop self-administration and become more flexible, because every school has its own circumstances and requirements. Our school is unusual and so our requirements are unusual, too.

As far as I understand, Law No. 83 also allows some differentiation in per capita financing depending on how a particular school justifies its requirements and the investment it needs. Naturally, to keep this process in harmony, it is important for us to receive support from government education agencies, because most of our parents are novice administrators and they don’t necessarily have the financial resources. So, for example, even if under the new model, parents will be able to deal with current issues using charitable contributions or payments for some additional educational services, they still won’t have the resources for large-scale projects, such as capital improvements. We believe parents and teachers must maintain an intensive interactive dialogue with the government as the customer in the process and the builder of the entire system.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you, Mr Tomlyanovich. If you don’t mind, I’d like to make a few comments on your speech. Mr Tomlyanovich covered several interesting and important issues. At the end of his speech, he described the state as the customer that buys academic results from children, but initially he agreed with Mr Sluch, who said that parents are the customers. I’d like to discuss this point.

Of course, every parent – every single one – wants the best for their child. But every parent has their own individual understanding of what the best is. Some parents want their children to become theologians, priests; others want them to become mathematicians, artists, or musicians. Only the state can bring all these disparate desires together and create a well-organised, efficient, modern education system that acts as a foundation from which each person can pursue the specialty he or she wants. So both the parents and the state are the customers. These ideas should be reflected in the programmes that we are discussing today, which will be approved by the government tomorrow and then approved as a separate law in the State Duma. This is the first point I want to make.

Now about financial support: transitioning to new systems of compensation, reforming budget organisations does not mean cutting state financial support. God forbid! There is nothing about this in the law. If someone is afraid that something isn’t formulated well in the law and therefore the meaning can be distorted, we can correct this. This is the goal of our meeting, in fact.

As Mr Tomlyanovich said we are ready to help, including financially. I believe that parents should be able to contribute financially, but their contribution should be limited, because, as you said, not all parents earn the same amount, and it is 100% the state’s responsibility to support and improve the education system.

I think parents should participate in extracurricular activities. For example, Mr Tomlyanovich said that parents go on camping trips with the children here. A camping trip planned and organised by parents, pupils and teachers should not receive any money from the budget, as this activity is not part of the learning process. So parents can chip in and organise a camping trip. This is perfectly natural. There can be other extracurricular activities. However, parents should not be contributing money for the upkeep of school facilities, to buy new equipment, and so on. And, excuse me Mr Tomlyanovich, but I don’t think we should even create the option of voluntary contributions for these things. This creates a slippery slope, and what was once voluntary could turn into an obligation with time. This should not be in the law.

Stepan Tomlyanovich: Actually, I meant that parents, teachers and headmasters should make proposals about how to improve education, but that these proposals must be financed…

Vladimir Putin: This is very dangerous. If we allow this to happen, if you ask parents to help, it could turn into a mess. You work in a bank, right? Mr Lysenko works in another company; you are both businessmen, and you probably have money… But there are people who are not involved in business. It’s great if Mr Radulescu can sell something he’s written, but what if he can’t? I’m serious! And there are public sector employees. Teachers also have children and low salaries. So this is not something that we should pursue. The state must pay for the entire education system, including upkeep, repair and new equipment.

I would also like to address another issue: Mr Tomlyanovich spoke about training for teachers. The 2011–2015 federal targeted programme we are now discussing calls for the establishment of training centres in large schools. A total of 100 training centres must be established throughout the country, and at least 80,000 teachers must receive training in them from 2011 to 2015.

Additional advanced training centres for secondary school teachers must also be established in large pedagogical institutes in each federal district. You can speak now, Mr Lysenko.

Eduard Lysenko: I’d like to add something to what Mr Tomlyanovich has just said about the school. We attend school board meetings and meet with headmasters and teachers from time to time to discuss problems with the school. We really are involved in school life, which is good.

Why have we, the parents, chosen this particular school for our children? A school is not just a place where your son or daughter studies. As my mother said, the most important thing is that your child becomes a good person. Deciding on a school is like trusting your child’s life to a doctor.

This school allows parents who want to bring up their children properly to get involved in school activities. And I’m not referring to official events only. This relationship is much more personal. We participate in many different events together, make repairs and do everything else we are able to do for the school.

I’d like to hear your comments on autonomous educational institutions so as to understand their concept better. I wonder how the responsibilities of parents and the founding organisation will change, who has initiated this project, what new features this model has, and what the risks for businesses and society are. People receive all kinds of information about it all: some prefer online news, some rely on ads from mailing services, some are sceptical, and some don’t care at all.

Today we have a unique chance to hear the opinions of the prime minister, the education minister and the mayor of Moscow, who has carried out a similar experiment in the Tyumen Region. I come from Yaroslavl and I know how difficult the situation is in the regions, so for me…

Vladimir Putin: Good. Let’s start with the person who has already carried out a project like this in one region. His experience is particularly valuable and his opinion on this issue is especially important now that he has become the new head of a major Russian region, the city of Moscow. He can share the experience he gained while implementing the project in the Tyumen Region as the governor and tell us in detail what the effects have been. We have discussed the concept behind the new type of educational institutions more than once. Mr Sobyanin has introduced it in his region and such institutions have proved to be quite stable. Mr Sobyanin, please.

Sergei Sobyanin: Thank you. I’d like to focus on several issues.

Vladimir Putin: As a matter of fact, they created an autonomous institution and introduced per capita financing.

Sergei Sobyanin: The concept of new budget-funded educational institutions calls for the government to place orders with them. I understand that the idea of an order placed with a school might appear strange to many. But it’s the simplest mechanism we can go with. In fact, schools are already carrying out these orders. The government essentially pays for these orders through the funding mechanisms currently used across the country, including in Moscow.  

For example, a school receives 60,000 or 70,000 roubles per student. Let's say it's 63,000 roubles. The headmaster receives the money and organises work at the school. That’s the concept of a state order with regard to schools. The system already functions this way.

Schools can also draw upon private funds, but this amount is insignificant, about 250,000 roubles on average. Some schools attract more funds but still these sums are meagre compared with budget funding, 26 million roubles. Private investments are deposited in centralised accounts, redistributed there and then provided to schools, as required by budget legislation.

Vladimir Putin: But schools almost never receive this money in fact.

Sergei Sobyanin: This money is returned to the schools a year after it’s been taken away. But nobody wants their money to be taken away and divided up. People want their money to go toward what they invest it into. Otherwise they say that the state should fund schools on its own.

This dilemma, in fact, violates the law because money is withdrawn. To put an end to it, we have granted government-funded agencies the right to accumulate money and spend it along with us. Schools also require self-government: the principal should not spend money on his or her own. The staff should take part in distributing the money.

There is another improvement: funds are now written out in the school budget. Schools are funded according to general standards but each school earmarks expenditures on salaries, teaching aids, maintenance fees, etc. I asked Mr Sluch whether he knew the amount his school was entitled to according to standards, and how much was earmarked to pay utility bills. He said he did not. How do you like that? He has a large school. It spends five to six million roubles on maintenance alone!

Mikhail Sluch: It will be 3.8 million next year.

Sergei Sobyanin: Sorry, I guessed incorrectly, but you didn’t know the number when I asked you about it this morning.   

Mikhail Sluch: It makes sense, Mr Sobyanin, because, in essence, the money goes right past the school.

Sergei Sobyanin: That’s it. I said: “Mr Sluch, if you were saving money – let say, by switching off the lights in the classroom on time or filling cracks in window frames, you would save around 800,000 roubles. You would care then!”

Mikhail Sluch: The money will be taken away, all the same…

Sergei Sobyanin: No one will take it with the new system. The money is at the school’s disposal now. You will have all your savings in hand. In other words, the school will have control over budgeting its expenses, no longer receiving strict financial estimates from the higher authorities. As the law specifies, current funding standards cannot be reduced by any means. This point is enshrined in law now.

Vladimir Putin: Is this clear? If you save money this year, your funds will not be cut next year. You will get everything you are entitled to. This is a critical matter.

Sergei Sobyanin: The new law does not say a word about any additional paid services. We grant schools the right to offer paid services but this does not mean that fees might be taken for standard, government-funded services. This must not be done. Anyone who does this will end up in jail. So the introduction of government-funded agencies… It’s a long-standing arrangement in schools that have shifted to per capita financing. But Moscow has a problem because such financing is very unusual here. Let say that it gets 63,000 roubles.

Mikhail Sluch: I am sorry, Mr Sobyanin, but the money is meant not for “it” but for the students of this school.

Sergei Sobyanin: Excuse me, I mean that the city allocates 63,000 roubles per student in this school but there are schools getting 120,000 or even 200,000. These schools educate ordinary Moscow children – kids like any others – but it’s difficult to get a child into this school. Parents stand in queues for days and nights, camping out in the school yard to register their children at this particular school, and some try to pull strings the old-fashioned way. So these affluent schools serve the chosen few – the elite children of elite parents. Government grants vary: your student gets 63,000 roubles while some get 200,000, 100,000 or 120,000. As a result, similar children are getting different education and consequently unequal opportunities. This is something that needs to be considered. I don’t mean we should put an end to an arrangement that took years to establish, but parents have some objections and this has caused tension across the entire system. Now, about average salaries: I heard that the average monthly salary of a teacher in Moscow is 40,000 roubles a month. It is 26,000 in this school, and there are even some teachers that make as little as 14,000 a month.

Vladimir Putin: We mean salary rates.

Sergei Sobyanin: Yes, rates. If the average rate in Moscow is 40,000 roubles, it means some teachers make 80,000 a month. This imbalance should be eliminated gradually and calmly – we don’t need some kind of revolutionary change.

Vladimir Putin: I would like to add to what Mr Sobyanin has said. We are discussing per capita financing. What does this mean? True, teachers’ earnings here are below the average in Moscow but the quality and organisation of the education available to the students, introduced by Mr Sluch, are good enough – or Mr Tomlyanovich would not have brought his second child to this school. Am I right? I think he was satisfied with the educational standards of this school. If the school weren’t good enough, he would have taken his younger child to another one. In this case the number of students in this school would go down and the school would have less funding according to the new system than it has today. For comparison, according to the old system, a school gets money regardless of the number of students it has or the quality of its teachers. That’s what per capita financing is about.

Sergei Sobyanin: There is another aspect of this, closer connected with wage system…

Vladimir Putin: This is clear – when parents don’t like a school and don’t send their children to it, the number of students shrinks and school financing is cut accordingly. It’s different with mandatory school budgets – they don’t depend on the number of pupils, and the money goes back to the state budget again and again.

Sergei Sobyanin: This is over and done with. A majority of Russian schools have shifted to per capita financing, but wage systems differ from school to school. Moscow retains a single rate scale. I think it’s the only region to have that – there may be another half a dozen or so, but no more. What’s the result of it? When we evaluate a teacher’s performance, which we have talked about, we only see which teacher is better and which is worse – but what’s the point? They don’t have any incentives. Schools don’t have any bonus funds. Teachers are paid the following way: a teacher who wins awards and has more experience gets a raise while the young teacher gets less. This should be taken into consideration. But schools should have a bonus fund apart from salaries, bonuses that depend on the quality of teaching and extramural activities. As customers, you should take part in determining who gets a bonus with the school principal because you know which teachers are rude to children and who treats pupils properly. This does not mean that bad teachers should be put before the firing squad, but you should feel involved and speak up.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Lysenko, here is the answer to your question. Budget financing will be maintained in full, and will not be cut on any item. Any additional amount saved by the school will be at the disposal of school authorities to be spent as they deem best, parents taking part in the decision-making process. Extra-budgetary funds will also be at the school’s disposal in the same manner on school priorities.

Last but not least, government funds will reach the school in full in accordance with the number of students. This is what we mean by government education contracts. Mr Mikhail Starodubtsev, a teacher, has the floor.

Mikhail Starodubtsev: Thank you very much. There were many moments when I was eager to join the conversation. This is what I would like to start with: I came to education from a very different field. I graduated from a conservatory; I was not supposed to work at a school. There wasn’t any pedagogy in the curriculum – the conservatory was training star performers. I only mention this because we see things at this school which have a great emotional impact, largely due to its treatment of what we call extracurricular activities, a term presupposing their secondary status. There are basic disciplines and secondary ones. What has direct appeal to the soul is something secondary unlike, let’s say, mathematics, with its rigid nature...

Remark: Mathematics is one of the basic disciplines.

Mikhail Starodubtsev: It is. We have excellent art and music teachers, and their goal is to make their supplementary classes basic, to a degree. A father of one of our students said how important it is to be a good person. I think it is one of the national objectives because, as everyone sees, a shallow or callous person is rather dangerous to the community, however well educated he might be. So I want to say again that… A woman I know said once: “All those twelve years, I ran to school as if I had wings.” I think that many teachers have wings and want to pass them on… But our secondary status is somewhat embarrassing: We have to find the time for extracurricular classes, which are occasionally not scheduled as they should be. We think these disciplines should be among the basic ones. That is what I wanted to say, though I had to be brief about it.

Vladimir Putin: Mr Starodubtsev, the matter entails several problems. The first thing that will be addressed mainly at the professional level by top experts with the progressive techniques  – we have enough child psychologists and experts on human development – is the load on students, which cannot grow endlessly. So much for the first problem.

The other is just as important. As I have already said, the implementation of new systems of teaching and new systems for determining wages does not entail a transition to requiring people to pay for tuition. You say that we should extend the number of basic disciplines, and this implies that the state should fund them.

Mikhail Starodubtsev: I don’t mean extending the number – I only think that people should change their attitudes about what the basic disciplines are.

Vladimir Putin: No, Mr Starodubtsev. If these are really fundamental disciplines as you say, it means that the state should finance them. So we should see whether we can increase the load on the students and if we can, then by how much. If it is possible, we need other experts to determine the priorities of education. I do not think such matters should be settled at the administrative level. They require professional discussions and final decisions based on expert conclusions. We should give them funding from the budget only after that happens. It is all possible.

The Ministry of Education has created new standards. We should analyse every detail of them – check economic estimates, take stock of any additional load, and see how they will be financed. This matter demands the most careful attention.

As for the arrangement of priorities in core classes, this is mainly up to education experts to decide. It is up to teachers to say what they consider essential. Mr Starodubtsev says that we should raise our children to be good people. That is also a crucial matter. Not only important, but the thing that matters most! The rest will follow naturally. If we fail to do the main thing – bring up decent people, all the rest is pointless. But how can we bring up decent people? What is the most important here: literature, history or music? And where does science fit in? We have the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences and other institutions for that purpose. They are supposed to make decisions and promote them at the administrative level. We will, of course, respect their opinion.

Please, Ms Merkulova, you have the floor.

Galina Merkulova: Thank you, Mr Putin. I have a feeling that we are carrying on the dialogue that began at the organising committee of the Teacher of the Year contest. I am very glad to have been invited here. I don’t know if trade unions still exist here. Perhaps it can help us and our trade unions will get one more organisation. But that is just a joke.

The issues we are debating are very important, and so is the discussion of the questions that are being asked by the members of our governing council. I understand how important it is. As usual, you hit the nail on the head and anticipate the questions that may be asked here. I would like to emphasise several points.

First, when I look at Mr Sobyanin I understand that he was the trail-blazer in introducing a new pay system and I am aware that it depends critically on who has invested in it and how much and how seriously they have approached the matter. We say that a new pay system should be introduced in all the regions, but when we look at how it is being introduced…We have been negotiating for four hours and talks are due to start in government about the demands…Of course, they approached the job very systemically, they offered social packages, money for retired teachers. Yes, Mr Sobyanin, I know it all by heart.

Sergey Sobyanin: All reforms…

Vladimir Putin: You are into very serious issues now. So serious that the walls are coming down.

Galina Merkulova:  When we confine ourselves to the zero option and say that we have adopted a new pay system, when we confine ourselves to staff cuts – and we do have some staff that we do not need – that is not the way. It is very dangerous and it has very real consequences.

As for Law 83, if we had a trade union here they would not be asking questions about Law 83.

Yes, we do feel a bit concerned about the content and we turn to you and so on. First, it is thanks to you that we have been included in all the working groups, in particular in the Finance Ministry, and we are trying together with the Education Ministry to identify the things there that need polishing. I am not going to dwell on them. That can be done.

In addition, together with the ministry we are trying to increase general awareness of what it is all about, how to prepare for it and what mechanisms may give rise to problems. It is a very complicated law and we should tread warily so to speak. So, we continue work on Law 83 and look at the kind of impact it is having. It is true that upgrading qualifications is important and has always been important. You have mentioned some things, for example the retraining centres. A law has been passed. Of course, let us face it, the previous law was outdated, it entitled a teacher to a retraining course once every five years. We console ourselves by saying that it is a Soviet-era law. Actually, teachers should receive training every year. We know that in the countries where education is being modernised effectively, in the OECD countries, for example -- and we should set a similar target -- a teacher takes a 100-hour retraining course every year, free of charge. Given our scale, it is difficult to implement, but we should move in that direction step by step.

Various approaches have been proposed to upgrading teachers’ skills. But for some reason the current mechanism is pegged to the number of pupils. Somebody suggested some time ago that the salary should be proportionate to the number of pupils. We do not think it is the right approach today and we insist on the approach we have already discussed with Mr Putin. Every teacher should get a voucher, and this should be sealed in the mechanism which should explicitly state that the teacher can chose where to go for refresher training, maybe to the retraining centre or maybe to the skills upgrading institute. Of course, the regional authorities should also be involved in implementing it.

That is why we are advocating this approach… We keep talking about efficiency: efficiency and quality must be assessed because pay depends on them today. We try to introduce incentive bonuses but we have hardly any common scientifically valid definitions of what effectiveness means. Every region and republic has its own… take the Unified State Examination (EGE). We all understand very well that EGE is not an absolute assessment of the teacher’s work. There are so many components… I am aware that this is very complicated because the teacher’s work has a deferred result. We cannot afford to slip back to what we had in the 1970s-1980s (the best teacher is the one who gives the highest marks) and revert to these mistaken approaches. It has long been recognised that it was wrong. And yet we have regions where the teacher’s performance is evaluated by the number of top marks he or she gives.

We should take another long hard look and develop optimal benchmarks for all because evaluation in this case must be as accurate as possible. There may be some variations but there must be a common scientific basis.

Next issue. We talk about federal standards, which is also a very important issue. Naturally we take part in shaping these standards. I would like to say the following. We include certain conditions: staff, finances and school resources. We name the things that we need but there are no standards for financial support. As a result we can write whatever we like but that won’t make any difference. I think that is another thing that we need to pay attention to.

The same holds for remuneration standards. I am not going to engage you in a discussion on remuneration because that is a separate matter. I still hope that I will have time to discuss it with [Deputy Prime Minister] Alexander Zhukov. We have long been planning to do it.

Another point. I think we got a little carried away with calculating the surplus of teachers. Certain changes are underway and I have an important request, Mr Putin. At the end of last year, the Ministry of Regional Development prepared a methodology for assessing how efficiently budget funding is spent. When we looked at it we had the impression that it is not entirely justified. We submitted our version to the government. I can’t say that any objections were raised; there were no objections. But as far as we know the next step is being prepared. It includes half of our proposals but when we looked at the draft… I have a very urgent request to you: before signing this last, second version, the second iteration of this methodology, could you give instructions to set up a working group consisting of trade union representatives and experts? What do you criticise education for? For not using budget funding efficiently, which has prompted the conclusion that we have 200,000 more teachers than we need. Actually we are short of teachers in a wide range of subjects. I will end here and I am urging you to set up a working group.

Vladimir Putin: Say it again, what methodology is that?

Galina Merkulova: A working group jointly with the Ministry of Regional Development and trade union representatives.

Vladimir Putin: What methodology is it supposed to discuss?

Galina Merkulova: The methodology of assessing the efficiency of the use of budget money, specifically in the education system.

Vladimir Putin: All right, the Minister is here. And I will give him this instruction right away.

Galina Merkulova: Just one more thing. I would like to express our gratitude for the new pre-school education development strategy in our federal district. That is very welcome. I would like to tell you, Mr Putin, that next week we will hold the first national contest of pre-school Teacher of the Year initiated by the trade unions in the Moscow Region together with the Ministry. Could you find the time in your schedule and attend at least the closing of the contest at 2 p.m. on November 19?

Vladimir Putin: On the 19^th? Next week? All right.

Galina Merkulova: Sixty-four representatives from Russian regions, some wonderful pre-school children will take part in the contest.

Vladimir Putin: All right, I’ll see what I can do. If I am in Moscow…

Galina Merkulova: They would be very happy, the whole of Russia will be happy.

Vladimir Putin: All right. Thank you very much.

Well, I will permit myself to say a few words. What are we talking about here? I will decipher what Galina Merkulova has said, especially for the benefit of the parents. Actually, it is important both for the teaching community and for the parents. As regards the shortage of teachers, I agree that we have no such shortage. We have a demographic problem. Why do we pay so much attention and allocate so much money to dealing with the demographic problem? First, Russia should have a decent population.

Second, we obviously have a demographic trough that is unconnected with current activities and there will be fewer students in higher education and in secondary schools than today. The number of teachers must match the number of students, Ms Merkulova. That is the way it is. These are objective statistics.

We even know approximately how many students we will have in schools and at universities. This is an obvious fact. And we should not pretend that we do not notice it. Whether we like it or not, it is like the sun rising. It cannot be otherwise. We must be prepared for it and we must know how to support university and school teachers in the broad sense, in all education (in higher education and in secondary schools). We must know in order to be ready to allocate resources and plan in advance, organise retraining, understand the opportunities open to these people and so on. Perhaps extra money should be allocated to reduce the number of pupils in schools and preserve the main body of teachers as the number of pupils in a school diminishes. That is an option. There are many options. But we should think about it in advance together with you (with the trade unions).

The second point has to do with autonomous institutions. What fears do the trade unions have? Autonomous institutions are granted the right to optimise their staff, that is, have as many teachers in the school as the school principal considers optimal for achieving a quality result – providing quality education. How will that be done? For example, how many teachers do you have?

Mikhail Sluch: You mean full-time staff positions?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, full-time.

Mikhail Sluch: 26 teachers plus 17 pedagogical positions.

Vladimir Putin: So there are 26 plus 17. So any school principal can say: "I am cutting staff and using the money saved to raise pay for the remaining teachers." I understand that this is what was done in the Tyumen Region. And likewise, you saved on utility costs and generated an income from extracurricular activities and some other work, you raised some off-budget resources and optimised the size of your staff and you used all that money to raise teachers' salaries.

What are the trade unions afraid of? They are afraid that when the teaching staff is trimmed, they will first of all get rid of retirement age people. Wealthy regions, such as Tyumen (Tyumen is a wealthy region with a healthy budget) create systems of bonuses for the teachers who retire and provide an additional financial package. The people are happy and the school is happy because it gains additional resources for raising the pay of those who remain and that makes it possible to hire good, top-class teachers because the salaries are higher and one can bring in those who are in demand on the market. The quality of education instantly improves. That is a positive multiplier effect.

But we should give thought to people. First – and the trade unions are right about this – we should think about those who retire. Second, these are retirement age people, and that is why we have the retirement age: so that people retire on time and get a decent pension. Pensions should be raised for everyone, this is the universal way of solving problems.

And the third point. There is one more circumstance to be kept in mind. I visit schools, once I walked into a classroom where they had teacher retraining and I saw that many of the teachers were very mature, obviously of retirement age. There was one woman who was working on a computer with the Internet, using modern teaching methods, and she did it with great enthusiasm. I said: "Do you like it?" She replied: "It is fantastic. I don't want to retire. It is so exciting." I asked the principal, I said: "Listen, is she going to retire?" He said: "No, we won't let her. She is a top-class teacher, absolutely top class. And she has learned all the modern methods." The principal will never want to get rid of such a teacher, you see? So one should not do it mindlessly, you are absolutely right: We should cherish talent and professionalism. And of course, we should show three times more care for teachers. We will yet have a chance to think about it together.

Over to you now.

Andrei Afonin: May I?

Vladimir Putin: Go ahead, please.

Galina Merkulova: I am terribly sorry, Mr Putin.

Vladimir Putin: What’s the matter?

Galina Merkulova: I have to leave for the government meeting.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course. They are so strict, those government people, they will be angry with you if you do not show up. You are free to go. Especially since you have already had your say. Actually, Mr Zhukov is a real gentleman and he won’t be offended if you are late. Tell him that you were detained because you were talking to me and he will forgive you. Andrei Afonin, please.

Andrei Afonin: I would like to follow up on the subject we were just discussing, but I would like to look at it from a different angle. The whole topic can be described by an unflattering word “cover”. It is about integrated education because it is becoming more and more relevant generally, and for schools too. It is true that many children who come to school have special needs, some of them are children with limited abilities. The school finds itself in a situation when it does not know how to have these children master the curriculum because we do not have enough qualified personnel. I want to raise the subject of qualified personnel once again. How is personnel training planned? There must be additional tutors, as we call them now, who must be financed and they must help the schoolteacher. Our schools do have such children. This is one of the innovations our schools support. It is very important.

Vladimir Putin: That is a very important issue. This is actually the third time we are discussing it. But it has both the professional aspect and the social aspect – it is not by chance that the trade unions have raised it. They say that if you allow the schools, educational institutions to optimise the size of their teaching staff, that is, if they feel (incidentally, such issues may be decided together with the parents) that they need to get rid of somebody under the pretext that he or she does not make the professional grade, give them a chance to take a retraining course in time and pay for that course. I have already said that we envisage the creation of 100 centres at leading schools and in every region and additionally retraining centres at teacher training colleges and universities. I would like to ask the Minister to speak about it in more detail. You have the floor.

Andrei Fursenko: With your permission, Mr Putin, I will start with the question that has just been raised. It is a very important issue. First, we are launching a new programme, which we recently discussed. It is called Accessible Environment and its aim is to enable children with limited abilities to attend mainstream schools.

Vladimir Putin: I had occasion to speak about it recently when we discussed the adaptation of people with disabilities to the environment in general. Creating the so-called unobstructed environment; we have a long way to go to achieve it but we have to begin somewhere.

Andrei Fursenko: But there is one more thing. Our ministry in its time was developing a methodology under the guidance of Isaak Kalina, who has left his ministry post and taken up a job in the Moscow City.

Vladimir Putin: With your permission…  

Andrei Fursenko: Yes. Regarding the schools which admit children with special needs, there should be much higher allocations for those children. It will still end up being cheaper for the state than funding specialised schools. On the other hand, the extra money will pay for additional retraining.

As far as I know these standards are not yet applied in Moscow. But we expect that it will be done.

One more thing. Ms Merkulova said some things which I do not agree with. Nobody is going to apply the same standards to schools that have very few pupils and to large urban schools.

Of course, there is one set of standards for schools where there are 15-20 pupils. But at the same time we have schools in this country where the number of pupils and teachers is about equal. And of course, that will have to change. This is caused by the demographic problem. We must do something to regulate this system. Again… the adoption of the new remuneration system and financing on the basis of the number of pupils, it has been adopted not only in wealthy regions such as Tyumen, but also in Tver, Pskov, North Ossetia…

Vladimir Putin: Kaliningrad.

Andrei Fursenko: Honestly, these are very poor regions. But their result is the same in terms of …

Vladimir Putin: Let us say that their budgets are not as extensive as in Tyumen.

Andrei Fursenko: Yes, they…

Vladimir Putin: But they are not poor.

Andrei Fursenko: No, they are not poor, but they have problems. Still, on the subject of retraining. I will be reporting tomorrow on the federal targeted programme in greater detail. But I would like to say that the main task is to create conditions that will enable every teacher to really upgrade his or her skills.

And there is another thing that we have also agreed on with the trade unions. If a teacher is unable or unwilling to upgrade his qualifications he must look for another job. According to this new teacher attestation requirement, every teacher must submit to attestation once every five years. Those who do not meet the standards or have failed to meet these standards after retraining that has been offered to them must look for another job. This is also one of the approaches in the new federal targeted programme. We believe that this is fair because after all the pupil is the most important person in a school. If the pupil is not provided with a good teacher then the school fails to perform its function. There is a whole range of other issues…

Vladimir Putin: But the state must do everything to provide teachers with an opportunity to upgrade their qualifications.

Andrei Fursenko: Initially, you may remember there was the first organising committee for the Year of the Teacher. This objective was set at the time and we agreed on the requirements with the trade unions and we agreed on how this should be organised.

Vladimir Putin: You have agreed and that is fine. But the trade unions rightly raise the issue of financing.

Andrei Fursenko: This is to a large extent the aim of the new programme, along with, incidentally, a new system of evaluating quality so that the quality of teaching at schools and preschools and at all levels of education is not assessed only through the Unified State Examination. The assessment must be done not only by the state through the Unified State Examination but by the state together with society bringing in professional associations, parents, if we are talking about schools, who would assess each school not only internally but also by comparing it with other schools. Proceeding from that one can raise the issue of which schools should be given more responsibilities and opportunities to enroll more children and perhaps help them to expand the premises, and what schools should be reorganised.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you. Anything else?

Thank you all for this discussion today. We will make use of everything that was said today in our practical work, we will take another look at what the Ministry has prepared and what it has included in the federal targeted programme, and it should become our main instrument in implementing the presidential initiative called Our New School. It is a programme that will last for several years. I hope that it will have a direct impact on the education processes in Russia and this is one of the main priorities for any government. I would like to congratulate you on having such a school and once again congratulate Mikhail Sluch on his results. 

Mikhail Sluch: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Some graduates of that school are known throughout our country and all over the world. I would like to wish this school to produce more graduates like Tarkovsky and Voznesensky, who I think are among your alumni.

Mikhail Sluch: Yes. 

Vladimir Putin: Mikhail Starodubtsev said that what he does is optional, but I know that you have also achieved some impressive results in music teaching. You have won a contest, right? I congratulate you on that even though it is not part of your formal curriculum. It shows that the process is well organised and that you have a team of talented people.

Thank you very much. I wish you all the best.