After a long period of discussion, the Russian Armed Forces are moving towards the practical implementation of military reform. Of course, one can argue about how well thought out the content aspect of this reform is, how optimal the timing of its implementation is, but the fact remains that radical changes have already begun. The most important consequence of the reform process should be the acquisition of a decent position in society by a person in uniform, as well as a favorable environment for self-improvement of the individual within the military team itself.

Data from sociological studies indicate that military personnel are not satisfied with the existing relations within military collectives.

It is clear that the task of ensuring the reform process in this direction is extremely difficult and should be assigned to specialists for whom issues of moral and psychological support and social work are a profession. It is difficult to overestimate the importance of educating officers armed with modern knowledge, devoid of ideological load, in the period of army reform. Meanwhile, a paradoxical situation has been created: if the training of specialists in socio-psychological specialties for the regiment level and above is organized at the proper level (this task is assigned to the Military University of the Ministry of Defense), then training of personnel for the platoon-company-battalion level is practically not conducted anywhere after the disbanding of military-political schools. But it is precisely at this level - in a platoon, in a company, in a battalion-that the main work on educating military personnel of the new, reformed Russian army should be concentrated. It is already an indisputable fact: the number of negative phenomena in military collectives is growing.

The structure of criminal records is still dominated by such dangerous military crimes in the conditions of the army, such as evasion from military service and violations of the statutory rules of relations between military personnel.

The number of crimes and incidents committed by military personnel under the influence of alcohol is growing annually and amounts to an average of 7% of their total number in the Armed Forces. In 1997, the material damage to the state from actions related to the use of alcoholic beverages amounted to about 7 billion rubles.

Compared to the Soviet period, the number of suicides in the Armed Forces in 1996 more than doubled and amounted to 36 per 100 thousand people, while in 1991 the corresponding figure was 15. The number of suicidal incidents in the course of guard duty has increased, and every third of them occurred with the use of firearms. In 1996, over a hundred officers committed suicide, most of them young officers.

In 1997, there were ten tragic incidents when soldiers shot their colleagues. In 1997, about 50 conscripted and contract soldiers were killed, which is almost six times more than in 1996.

Against this background, there is no doubt about the need to train highly qualified specialists who can organize painstaking military and social work in the Armed Forces. Social insecurity and insecurity, in our opinion, are the main reasons for the decline in interest in the military profession and have a negative impact on the implementation of tasks related to the reform of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. We believe that the solution to this problem should be sought in the ways of forming the personnel potential of officers-educators for the troops in the higher civil school system. The effectiveness of this direction is evidenced not only by foreign experience, but also by domestic history. For example, in Soviet times, political officers for the airborne forces were trained, among other things, at the military department of the Higher Komsomol School under the Central Committee of the Komsomol under the leadership of the former first Deputy Commander of the Airborne Forces, Lieutenant General I. Lisov.

Many civilian universities currently do not have military departments. That is why it is so relevant to talk about the interaction of civil and military education systems in the training of officers-educators. The advantages of such cooperation are obvious: first, civil universities have highly qualified teaching staff in the field of social work and social pedagogy, who are able to provide training of specialists in accordance with the requirements of the State Educational Standard. There is no need for a military university to select faculty members and create new departments, which is especially problematic in the context of optimizing the network of military educational institutions (and also requires quite a lot of time). Secondly, with a high level of training in the specialty, expenses are sharply reduced. A student, unlike a cadet, does not need three meals a day, uniforms, bath and laundry services, etc.

The disadvantages of such training are less obvious. These include a lower level of military training of students. But, firstly, the lack of time for military training (and compared to cadets, students will have it, of course, less) can be compensated by the high professional skills of teachers, and, secondly, the lack of service experience will be quickly replenished in the army, if desired, which, unfortunately, cannot be said about the absence special knowledge.

The disadvantages include an insufficient level of motivation of students, their moral and psychological unwillingness to serve in the military. But after all, not all students will receive a military specialty, but only those who express such a desire, that is, it is already possible to talk about a certain motivation. Certain regulatory documents should also be developed that provide for the student's responsibility (including material responsibility) for non-fulfillment of the contract with the Ministry of Defense on obtaining military education. Finally, even in the event of non-fulfillment of their obligations, the student will still serve in the Armed Forces. What could not be said until recently about cadets of military schools. Taking advantage of the imperfection of the legislative framework, they served two or three years in the walls of the school, received an education,and then quietly settled in... to a civilian university or "in civilian life". According to Defense Minister Igor Sergeev, only a third of those who were recruited for the first year were in the ranks of graduates of military schools in 1997.

Let us consider the proposed mechanism and organizational forms of cooperation between the military and civil education systems on the example of the Ryazan State Pedagogical University (RSPU) and the Ryazan Higher Airborne School. In the airborne forces, there is an urgent need for deputy commanders of companies and battalions for educational work. The school itself does not have the appropriate teaching staff and educational and methodological support.

At the same time, Ryazan State Pedagogical University has both the material base, scientific personnel, and educational and methodological support for training qualified specialists in the field of educational work. All this is available at the Department of Social Pedagogy of RSPU, where students have been trained in the specialty "social pedagogy" for four years, and next year the first graduation of such specialists will take place.

It is assumed that students will sign a contract with the Ministry of Defense, according to which, after studying at the university, they undertake to serve in the Airborne Forces as educational officers for the time established by law. At the same time, of course, the student's responsibility for non-fulfillment of the contract should be determined.

The model of interaction between civil and military universities in the interests of training personnel for the Armed Forces has not yet been developed. Such an interaction, if realized, would represent an important experiment. Combining the efforts of the university and the airborne school for officer training can take the following organizational form. The University provides teaching staff and educational and material resources for training students in natural sciences, humanities, and socio-economic disciplines. The school takes on the training of future officers in military-professional disciplines (including humanities-such as methods of educational work in the military, military psychology and pedagogy, etc.), allocating teachers and the appropriate educational and material base for this.

And one more important point in favor of such cooperation. Unlike training at the military department, training at the school (albeit relatively short-term) together with cadets will contribute to the formation of loyalty to "their" branch of the armed forces, a sense of pride in belonging to elite troops, and the spirit of paratrooper patriotism.

Analysis of the current curriculum for students of RSPU in the specialty "social pedagogy" shows that the total amount of time (excluding independent work) allocated to the study of military-professional disciplines can be up to 1000 hours. This, as the practice of teaching in military departments of universities shows, is enough to train an officer in the platoon - company level.

Of course, organizational issues of interaction between a civilian university and a higher military educational institution require additional study and coordination at various levels, including at the level of the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of General and Professional Education. However, the prospects for such cooperation are very impressive.

Lieutenant Colonel D. POZHIDAEV, Candidate of Social Sciences, Associate Professor, Professor of the Ryazan Higher Airborne Command School N. N. STEPANOV, Candidate of Philosophical Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Sociology and Social Pedagogy of the Ryazan State Pedagogical University

Permanent link to this publication: