Compulsory placement of university graduates – a new challenge of our time
As it was before
When considering the problem of chronic shortage of basic budget specialists – doctors and teachers – one cannot ignore the Soviet experience of organizing higher education. If a Soviet citizen was old enough to study at a university at the expense of the budget (there was no other), then a stable and well-paid job awaited him. Teachers, doctors and engineers were rightfully considered the intellectual elite of the civilian sector of the economy. Only scientific and party workers were higher, perhaps. An even more rapid social elevator was provided by military education, but now we are not talking about it.
The average graduate of a higher educational institution could count on several career paths at once. The first was for the best - this was distribution to Moscow, republican, regional and provincial capitals. Next came industrial centers, and one step lower - the most remote regions and rural settlements. True romantics developed Siberia, the Far East and the Far North. For difficult conditions, they also paid decently.
For top-notch professionals and simply workers in short supply, prospects opened up in the socialist camp countries – Poland, the GDR, Hungary, Cuba, and so on. In addition to excellent studies, party reliability was also required – a mandatory requirement for any foreign assignment. At first glance, it seems that not the most successful students were sent to remote regions. For example, holders of honors diplomas would not be sent to Tyumen or Yakutsk. This is not entirely true. If we take medical and pedagogical education as a benchmark, as fundamental for the social well-being of the population, then the corresponding universities appeared in almost every regional center. Sometimes, even more than one.
Over time, a very well-functioning system was created in the Soviet Union, in which all needs for essential specialists were resolved within the region, territory, and republic. And mandatory distribution was not so traumatic - in most cases, no one was sent to work outside the home region. And it was necessary to work off the budget money for studying at a university for at least 3 years. In the overwhelming majority of cases, this smoothly transitioned from the category of temporary events to permanent ones. Young people settled down, acquired their other halves and children. In rural areas, they became a real intelligentsia, gradually raising the general educational level of the territory. Of course, for many this was a forced and not the most desirable decision, but it was okay - they coped. Times were different, so to speak.
It is worth understanding that a graduate of a medical or pedagogical university, for example, of the 1970 model and a modern one, are not equivalent values. This is putting it mildly. In the era of unbridled capitalism, higher education has become a mandatory component of every self-respecting Russian. And of those who do not respect themselves, too. Not one, but two or three "higher education" has come into fashion. Such multidisciplinary specialists can probably be found in the immediate environment of, perhaps, every reader of "Military Review".
In the 90s and 2000s, there was a real devaluation of the higher education diploma. Not only because the general level fell, but also because of the mass character. A certain elitism was preserved by a few higher education institutions in Russia - Moscow State University, Moscow State Technical University, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, and so on. But here, too, all sorts of non-core economic, legal, sociological and other faculties popped up like mushrooms after the rain. In many of them, students simply sat around in their pants and skirts, going out into the world as complete ignoramuses with five years of their lives lost. And hundreds of thousands, if not millions of budget rubles spent on them.
A modest justification for such an approach to life can be called a comparative increase in the general cultural level of the population - after all, universal higher education (even correspondence) cannot but affect the quality of human capital. However, this thesis also requires separate study.
Will the market decide?
Currently, a school graduate in the rank of an eleventh-grader can choose three paths of higher education for themselves - budget, budget target and paid. There are three more stages of higher education - bachelor's degree, specialist and master's degree, but this does not matter now. Let's focus on the method of payment for education. If education is paid, then everything is clear - the state, and with them we - taxpayers, should not have any claims. But there are questions about budget education.
The first is why can a person who spent several million rubles from the budget, graduating from a university, afford to work as a salesperson or a courier? Or, for example, go to a neighboring or distant foreign country to earn money? Sometimes, even in their specialty. Logic suggests that this approach can be applied to military universities. Why sign a mandatory contract for five years for a young lieutenant if a graduate of the pedagogical faculty does not go to work in a school? A slightly incorrect comparison, but the principle is similar.
The second question concerns budgetary targeted training. Why has the form of training that guarantees subsequent employment become the lot of "C" students and, at best, "B" students? Applicants who get the minimum passing scores sometimes enroll in targeted training. And these are future teachers, doctors and other highly qualified personnel. It turns out to be a kind of reverse selection, when not the best, but the worst possible ones are hired. At the same time, not all "targeted students" work the required 3-5 years, and some do not work at all after university.
It's all about the mass of legal loopholes and workarounds. Up to the point that the costs of targeted training can be reimbursed so as not to work off the required amount, which ultimately turns out to be more profitable than the paid option. It must be admitted that the concept of targeted training in pedagogy and medicine has shown complete inconsistency. Otherwise, there would not be such a wild shortage of personnel in schools and hospitals. At the same time, competition for medical specialties is very high. Of course, there is less competition for pedagogical ones, but there is no shortage here either.
They thought that the labor market would solve everything, but it didn't work out that way. University graduates in free floating first fill places in commercial medical institutions, then in elite budgetary ones, and then... And then that's it - no one is ready to work voluntarily in the N-skaya village of the N-skaya municipality of the N-skaya region. The lack of qualified medical care and school education leads to the gradual degradation of this very N-skaya village. And young people are already refusing to live and work there, with all the ensuing consequences.
Let us ask the question after all the above – how popular are the changes to the Law on Education now, regulating the admission of applicants to budget places in universities and colleges, subject to their signing agreements on further employment by distribution “according to the qualifications received”? That is, we are returning to the Soviet distribution system. The question is very debatable. This will help fill schools, hospitals and other budget institutions. And will inevitably have a positive effect on the quality of services provided. With the exception of schools – the concept of “service”, as we remember, was recently excluded from education.
There will be several consequences. First of all, the number of applicants to state-funded programs will decrease. Whether this is good or bad is also debatable. The country lacks hundreds of thousands of workers and well-paid hands, and university graduates do not want to work in their specialty. A paradox, and nothing more. Maybe the number of applicants should be reduced precisely by mandatory employment after graduation? The most powerful obstacle to such initiatives will be the university lobby. University rectors will stand up against changes in the law, as they did in 2023 and all subsequent ones. The initiative with mandatory work for university graduates is not new and is discussed in Russia with enviable regularity. Perhaps, more often they only dream of abolishing the Unified State Exam. So far, none of the stories have become reality - someone is constantly interfering.
However, there is another way of development of events. It is not worth racking your brains with the distribution of graduates, but simply and sharply raise the salaries of teachers and doctors. Especially in that N-th village and others like it. But this is already a completely different story.
Information