The History of Soviet Education from 1918–1991
An analysis of the three major eras in Soviet education and Higher Education
This paper is an analysis of the three major eras in Soviet education and Higher Education. These three eras are: 1) Social militarization beginning in the 1930s; 2) the reshaping and research explosion under the Kruschev’s thaw in the sixties; 3) modernization during Perestroika in the 1980s, which was an eventual conversion of the Soviet system to a more western-style higher educational system. Condensing seventy years of history based on a few sources will be hard to accomplish, the goal of this paper is to explain the key determinants of each era, and to describe, in detail, how it compares to the Western system at the same time period. The progress of the Soviet Education system follows in line with the history of the Soviet Union as a whole, the Bolshevik takeover and transformation, the reformation and transcendence into a world power, and the transition to a more democratic and politically aware entity.
Prior to the October Revolution, foreign academics primarily operated and staffed higher education in the pre-revolutionary Russian Empire, in what was an alien, western university system. After the revolution, the entire education structure was withered down from twenty to only five universities and a handful of technical schools. The incoming Soviet leadership knew that this had to change. They needed ways to educate and pass literacy to their citizens to enable a communalization scheme that would be extraordinarily difficult without it.
Social Militarization of the 1930s
Immediately following the October Revolution, the Second All-Russian Congress was held in November of 1917. At the meeting of future Soviet leaders, party officials and dignitaries, Anatoly Lunacharsky would be appointed Commissar of Education. He would hold the position until 1929. During his time as Commissar, he would be the leading academic influencer for the new nation and would make many changes to Soviet educational and vocational systems between the time of the Revolution and his retirement. Lunacharsky’s education plan would take the Soviet Union through the first forty or so years of existence. Lunacharsky was responsible for many of the programs that led to the early success of educating the masses in the pre-Stalin era. In 1918, there were only five universities, in comparison to the United States who had 200 times more people with higher education experience and hundreds of more schools than the Soviet Union. There was a dire need to expand the education system, and in doing so, train and prepare the populace for the transition to communism. Thanks to the Soviet ideology of equality, education was universal, free of charge, and came with a guaranteed placement into a job post-graduation. During the pinnacle of its success, the Soviet higher education apparatus took in up to five million students per year between 1936 and 1986.
Soviet higher education was primarily established for the mobilization and utilization of the unskilled workforce to serve the nation. The vision of the communist party was to prepare a national workforce for the requirements of the state using “human material” in the advancement of state-owned resources. Lunacharsky and the Commissariat of Education were responsible for bringing literacy to 90.8% according to the 1939 Soviet Census from below 30% in 1897. This allowed a much larger percentage of the ever-growing population to be indoctrinated, educated, and politicized. (Mironov 235)
In his report, “Soviet Higher Education: an Alternative Construct to the Western University Paradigm,” Alexey Kuraev, a Doctor of Russian History and Higher Education, explains the evolution of Soviet higher education from 1918 until the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the ideology and management systems behind the education programs, and compares the VUZ (высшее учебное заведение or “higher educational institution”) to western-style universities. VUZ was the acronym for the universities, military academies and other technical/vocational institutes in the Soviet Union under the Ministry of Education. Following the complete integration of the VUZ into a Soviet state-wide system, the three-pronged management ideology of the higher education system was placed into effect: uniformity, top-down administration, and one-man management.
In the VUZ system, students did not choose their specialization or academic pursuits. The purpose of higher education was not personal but communal advancement. This led to a rather baffling approach of students being enrolled not in a specific university, but rather in a specialization. This meant that it was not uncommon for a student to be moved across the country to fill a quota. Order and discipline were of the utmost importance. Students were treated as if they were soldiers, they had to follow all orders given to them and there was no room for insubordination. Party officials along with the secret police would keep a close watch on students, this was to breed compliance and also acceptance of the Soviet way of life. Pupils who graduated were forcibly placed in specific jobs in a specific location and had three weeks to report for work. Those who did not were at risk of having their “qualification diploma” revoked and the near-certainty of being prosecuted.
The professors and researchers had no academic freedom to teach or pursue what they wanted to research. Due to top-down administration along with uniformity nationwide, the classes were taught directly from pre-approved textbooks, with no variation or delineation allowed. Every academic institution had a collection of administrative offices that were known as units. These units were numbered one through three, Unit №1 would hold security supervision, Unit №2 was used for army recruitment, and Unit №3 was for achieving institutional and personal documentation. Whenever there was an important test, invaluable research or any other noteworthy occasion on campus, the NKVD/KGB from Unit №1 would be present. This is just one example of how the state had the ultimate control in the education and research processes of the Soviet Union.
Because the VUZ was born out of a need to educate, train and prepare the masses to serve the state, it served a different function than western higher education systems. The VUZ system had a massive impact on Soviet society and economic growth as a whole, especially at the beginning. This anti-capitalist education system was both equal and academically uninspired. Totalitarian control was exemplified in the Soviet higher education system, which resulted in the lack of independent theoretical research, and free thought.
Khrushchev Thaw 1960s
Following Stalin’s death in 1953, Nikita Khrushchev would become the leader of the Soviet state. When he took over leadership, many of the strict rules in place under Stalin would slowly melt away. Khruschev himself called the reformist plan, a “rethinking of the educational process.” (Juviler 149)
This reform was primarily motivated by the lack of specialists graduating from the Higher Education system. In 1959, over 2.3 million students were enrolled in undergraduate programs in the USSR, despite these numbers, the leadership wanted to be able to provide education to even more people. The needs of the economy and the advancements of technology were two of the most important factors behind the educational overhaul.
While still centrally planned and organized, the reforms brought in new ideas and new plans to enable a fair and clearly defined admission process.
Previously, entrance exams were administered by only one proctor, because of this bribery, parental influence and favoritism ran rampant in the examination proceedings. The change would be implemented by ensuring that two independent proctors would evaluate all of the entrance exams to ensure fairness. Additionally, admissions interviews would also change under the reform act. Previously, only a high ranking member of the academic staff would partake in the interview process with potential new students. With the reforms in place, the local party, and trade union leaders also sat in on the interviews to ensure a fair and inclusive interview process. These two specific changes were largely tied to the privilege associated with attending a university, specifically in math and science.
There would be one other major change in the admissions and entrance requirements, especially for the highly sought after academic subjects; law, mathematics, science and technology, and teaching. Students were now required to have two years of work experience in the field in which they were planning on attending university, especially if it was in one of the previously noted fields of study. However, there was an exception to the rule in which students who had been enrolled in an honors program or were at the top of their class, would be allowed direct entry into these programs.
The changes in the education system allowed for a boom in the Soviet advancement of technology and science in the mid-1960s to the early 1980s. These reforms were vital to their improvement and advancement as a society overall, and which in turn led them to be an even more dominating world power.
Perestroika and Post-USSR 1980’s to today
From the mid-1980s until the fall of the Soviet Union, the education system went through reforms that would continue today. To some extent, the process was very much recycling processes and duties that were consistent with Soviet culture and upsetting them completely. While the nation was going through severe economic and political strife, the nation’s educators and academics were hot on the trail of establishing a new, improved, academically acceptable system of learning, research, and advancement.
In Ben Brodinsky’s article, “The Impact of Perestroika on Soviet Education” he tells the reader about how his Soviet interviewees responded about the biggest changes in their local schools and educational facilities. He said that “…first among the more profound influences of perestroika is new freedom sweeping all across education and reaching into every classroom and administrative office. It is real freedom. I was told — Nothing artificial or phony. And it is all-pervasive.” (Brodinsky 379)
Freedom and openness in the classrooms were a major stepping stone for the society as a whole. Gone were the days of government-mandated curriculum and policies regarding in-class behavior. In were the days of academic freedom and more relaxed rules. Teachers had the freedom to eliminate Marxist-Leninist philosophy and were not required to include the Communist Party line in their lectures. (Brodinsky 379)
The fall of the Soviet Union would change life and education for everyone in the nation. Some universities would privatize and would be accepted into the international community as major research facilities. Nationalization at the primary and secondary levels would be reduced and would follow a more Western-style as far as the administration is concerned.
Overall, perestroika led the Soviet Union to collapse due to the expansion of freedom and openness of opportunity. The effect that Gorbachov and his policies had, were felt for years into the future and could still be seen in some facets of Russian life and culture. Along with the massive deficits and popular uprising, the USSR would fall, and with it the Communist Party, and some Soviet traditions.
Throughout the 1900s there were many changes to Soviet/Russian educational systems, traditions, and practices. What started as a Western-styled academic university system would be chopped down and reformed into the vision of Anatoly Lunacharsky and the Second Communist Congress. Post-Stalin, the system began to expand and became a world power in the STEM fields. Krushchev’s reforms allowed for more advanced educational access and led to the education of millions of people. Finally in the late ’80s, with perestroika and glasnost reforms of Gorbachev, true freedom of thought was allowed to reign. Along with the democratic process being instituted in the 1989 election, and the continuing economic woes, the USSR collapsed under its own weight.
Education itself is power, and for so long the Soviet leadership tried to restrict and control the amount of knowledge and types of arguments that students and academics could have. When the government finally let go of outdated traditions and excessive policing of academia, the empire collapsed. One of the big questions that I have at this point is, Would the Soviet Union have collapsed if not for Gorbachev and his perestroika policies? Or was it simply a matter of time before an even more extreme and brutal fall happened?
Works Cited
Avis, G. “The Soviet Higher Education Reform: Proposals and Reactions.” Comparative Education, vol. 26, no. 1, 1990, pp. 5–12. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3099391. Accessed 20 Mar. 2020.
Brodinsky, Ben. “The Impact of Perestroika on Soviet Education.” The Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 73, no. 5, 1992, pp. 378–385. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20404646. Accessed 16 Apr. 2020.
Juviler, Peter H. “Current Reform Trends in Soviet Higher Education, 1959–1960.” Comparative Education Review, vol. 4, no. 3, 1961, pp. 149–158. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1186666. Accessed 20 Mar. 2020.
Kuraev, Alex. “Soviet Higher Education: an Alternative Construct to the Western University Paradigm.” Login, Springer, Feb. 2016,
Mironov, Boris N. “The Development of Literacy in Russia and the USSR from the Tenth to the Twentieth Centuries.” History of Education Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 2, 1991, pp. 229–252. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/368437. Accessed 20 Mar. 2020.
