Long, Delbert H. and Long, Roberta A. (Ed). (1999). Education of Teachers in Russia. Reviewed by Sergei N. Shirobokov, Omsk State Pedagogical University, Russia

Long, Delbert H. and Long, Roberta A. (Ed). (1999). Education of Teachers in Russia. London: Greenwood Press. 240 pp. $65       ISBN 0-313-31048-3 Reviewed by Sergei N. Shirobokov Omsk State Pedagogical University, Russia February 18, 2000             Education of Teachers in Russia describes the Soviet and Post Soviet Education in the Russian Federation from an American perspective by taking into account communist and post communist society challenges. It points out that teaching is undoubtedly the most important profession. What role in society can be more crucial than that which shapes children's lives and prepares them for adulthood?             Long and Long conducted the research in Russia, and interviewed among others, Professor Alla Triapitsina, Chair of the Pedagogy Department Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia in St. Petersburg.             In Chapter 1, Delbert Long and Roberta Long describe teacher education from Alexander II to Lenin. Specific focus is on the history of teacher education and how Schools and Universities and pedagogical institutions under the tsars were organized from the top down and the center outward and existed primarily to serve the interests of the individual. Schools at every level were expected to develop good citizens who willingly served the interests of the State The chapter concludes by "touching briefly on some of the many things that teacher education systems in Russia and the United States had in common from roughly 1861 to the end of the First World War.             Chapters 2 and 3 review the Soviet Period from Lenin to Gorbachev. The most crucial issue here is the publishing of pedagogical literature for course development. For example, a core of pedagogical discipline was developed during the 1930s consisting primarily of pedagogy, the history of pedagogy and educational psychology.             Anton Makarenko, a prominent educator during the Stalin period believed that the object of educational research should not be the child, but rather the educational "fact." Long and Long accurately note that Soviet citizens during the first half of the 1980s were proud of their school system. Unfortunately, the Soviet Schools did not provide students with correct information on World Development during those times because the USSR was a "closed" country.             Nowadays, educational leaders and scholars in Russia are seeking ways to understand civil society through Education. Hence, Soviet universities and other educational institutions are expected to play the leading role in creating a "new citizen" and a "new society" most Soviet educators have realized that without greater knowledge and understanding of the rights and obligations within a democratic society, the country cannot expect its citizenry to embrace democratic norms, and schools are the main means to convey this knowledge.             In chapter four, dealing with higher pedagogical institutions Long and Long discuss the use of dialogue as a pedagogical strategy to help students in teacher preparation programs learn how to think critically and creatively. Lack of textbooks is one of the hindrances to the strategy. In an interview, Valentina Smorgunova, Dean of the Faculty of the Social Sciences at Herzen State Pedagogical University, alludes to some issues involved in using this method. For example, all professors, except perhaps a few are trying hard to use the method of dialogue in order to help their students appreciate another position, a point of view other than their own, and to so organize their thinking processes to become more flexible and tolerant. Dialogue is a rather new an unfamiliar pedagogical strategy in Russia, and faculty members will need assistance in order to use it effectively in the classroom.             Chapter four concludes pessimistically by quoting from an article by Julia I. Toirchaninova, Vice-Rector of the Republican In-service Training Institute in Moscow, on a problem that has been disconcerting, if not demoralizing, to the more fainthearted among Russian educators. Part of the challenge to teacher education is that teaching is strongly related to personality, a dynamic about which we know very little. We do not know how people develop and gain the individual characteristics and particularities we observe. We do not know what different people need for their education. We dont know how personal education and experience evolve over time but we can do our best to help them happen.             Without radical changes in the teacher education system, all the reforms in education, together with increased funding for education, will miss their target and have no real influence on how young people are educated in Russia. The authors offer some crucial thoughts on the process of educational reforms in the Russian Federation and especially pay attention to teacher education under different Soviet and Russian leaders. With the downfall of the Soviet Union in December 1991, the USSR State Committee for Public education became defunct. Subsequently, when Yeltsin was elected chairperson of the Supreme Soviet in June 1990, he appointed a kind of red spirit, Dneprov, as Minister of education of the Russian Republic, a position he held until late 1992. Dneprov became the number one educator in the Russian Federation. The new system he had in mind would reflect in practice wholehearted dedication to key concepts such as Democracy, decentralization, private ownership, and multicultural education.             It is remarkable that the authors acknowledge philosopher Karl Popper's notion that educational reform is an especially difficult area. Before you can reform education, you have to reeducate the educators. The implementation of a new program with focus on Comparative and International Education is increasingly important for the success of educational reforms in the rapidly changing society.             In chapter five, dealing with comparative education development the authors highlights the development and problems of teacher education in America and Russia. In the past few years, many Russian educators have become very interested in what other countries are doing in their schools. Russian teacher training institutions offer very little opportunity for comparative education. Nowadays, the demand for Comparative and International Education in Russia is growing as students, faculty members and administrators seek to better understand the important role of education in civil society.             Unfortunately, Long and Long fail to mention the competition between Russia State pedagogical universities and the State (Classical) Universities, a problem being addressed by the Ministry of Education under the supervision of Vladimir Filippov. The National Doctrine 2000-2025, developed by Filipov, gives Russians "new hope" for teacher education improvement.             Delbert Long and Roberta Long's study successfully identified the strengths and weaknesses of teacher education in Russia. Education of Teachers in Russia is an ambitious attempt to compare Russian and American Education. It is one of the most important practical contributions to the field of Comparative Education. It should be widely used by graduate students as well as scholars alike. I highly recommend this book and hope it is on and off the bookshelves of both Russian and American teachers as they reflect on the modern situation of a democratic society. About the reviewer Sergei N. Shirobokov Visiting Scholar, Loyola University Chicago and Director, International Affairs Office, Omsk State Pedagogical University, Russia. Areas of Interest: Comparative and International Education, Teacher Education.