This article was downloaded by: [University of Glasgow]

On: 17 August 2013, At: 18:28

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK

Soviet Studies
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ceas19

Soviet students‐some
sociological perspectives
a
Mervyn Matthews
a
University of Surrey
Published online: 06 Nov 2007.

To cite this article: Mervyn Matthews (1975) Soviet students‐some sociological

perspectives, Soviet Studies, 27:1, 86-108

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09668137508410987

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all
the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our
platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,
completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of
the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.
The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be
independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and
Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,
demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in
relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access
 and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-
conditions
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013
 SOVIET S T U D E N T S -
SOME SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES
By MERVYN MATTHEWS

IN the course of the last decade students of many lands have attracted
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

public attention through their involvement in political and social unrest.

This has coincided with an upsurge in interest in the sociology of the
student body, and a number of serious studies has been devoted to it. As
mass higher education spreads, students become a rather distinct social
group with its own parameters.
The Soviet authorities have taken care to advertise the big growth in
student numbers in the USSR, but have scarcely,encouraged publication
on the problems of student life. The rebirth of sociological study in the
sixties, and perhaps the influence of Western fashion, have, however,
caused a few of the results of research into hitherto unexplored problems
to be published.
This article attempts to gather and collate some of the more inform-
ative material to hand. The topics chosen are among those which evoke
most interest in the West, and include the social background of students,
their standard of living, their attitudes to higher education and their
involvement in orthodox political activities. Finally, in a less familiar
vein, there is some attempt to evaluate their response to the state system
of placement after graduation. Many of the principal problems of Soviet
higher education—centralization and state control, course content, the
examination system, etc.—have been largely avoided by Soviet writers.
But it is arguable that an effort should be made to systematize such
scanty information as they have provided on Soviet students. This
survey is restricted almost entirely to full-time students, since the
problems of the part-timers (who make up nearly half the total) would
properly require a different treatment.

Social Backgrounds
By international standards young people in the Soviet Union have a
good chance of getting to college. Of the major nations, the USSR holds
second place in the provision of full- and part-time higher education,
with a ratio of 186 students per 10,000 of the population. The USA has
 87
1
by this count 269, and the United Kingdom 83- As in so many other
countries, however, the demand for places exceeds supply. In the USSR
there are probably on average three or four applications for each place.
This means that higher education is still a relatively scarce commodity,
and raises the familiar problems of selection.2
The drive to recruit specialists on a massive scale got under way in
the USSR at the beginning of the thirties. The official stance was always
that there could be no inborn differences of educability between social
groups. The children of the former exploiting classes were discriminated
against until the mid-thirties, but not on grounds of educability. Subse-
quently, higher educational institutions (VUZy) were in theory open to
all, regardless of social background. The presumption was that in the
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

event of there being more applications than places the most able young
people would be accepted. The Soviet intelligentsia, being a 'people's'
intelligentsia, would be drawn from the main social groups—-workers,
peasants and intelligentsia—in proportion to their size. Equality of
opportunity for the sexes was also envisaged, as were a fair balance of
students of urban and rural origin and adequate representation for the •
nationalities.
In practice there is a close relationship between a Soviet citizen's
chances of getting into a VUZ and his social background, very much as
in other advanced societies. Children from richer, better educated, or
more secure families find the task easier than their less favoured con-
temporaries. The fact of this social discrepancy was completely taboo
under Stalin, but since Khrushchev's public condemnation in September
1958 of the inequality involved, it has received increasing attention from
Soviet scholars.3 These have not gone quite so far as to correlate
opportunities for higher education with social status, but they have
provided a lot of data which point to a significant relationship. Moreover,
we are now in possession of a few sets of figures for the social composition
of the Soviet student body. But before presenting them let us look at the
formal process of selection.
Would-be students have to complete ten years of general schooling,
i.e. middle school, with good marks, and then, in most cases, pass a
competitive entrance examination or 'concourse' for the institution of
their choice. (We say 'in most cases' because pupils who finish school
particularly well gain a gold or silver medal which may fully or partially
1
We have for convenience taken the figures from Narodnoe khozyaistvo SSSR v
1972 godu (M., 1973), p. 120. Other and perhaps better estimates are available, but the
validity of this kind of statistic is in any case questionable, as much depends on part-
time study, the proportion of part-time students, the incomparability of standards,
age2 groups, etc.
This proportion is arrived at by estimating the number of general school graduates
who3 would probably apply for a VUZ place and the number of acceptances as published.
The name of V. N. Shubkin is probably best known in this respect.
 88 SOVIET STUDENTS:
exempt them from concourses.) A pupil with reasonable marks in his
school-leaving certificate may thus fail the VUZ entrance examination
if competition is great. There is no national clearing house for applica-
tions, and since every VUZ application has to be accompanied by the
candidate's personal documents only one application can be made at a
time. It has become usual, when the entrance examination results are
published at the end of August, for unsuccessful candidates to make
second or, exceptionally, third applications, to VUZy which are known
to have unfilled places. Obviously, these are less sought-after insti-
tutions—for the VUZy vary considerably in their attractiveness.
A great deal has been published on the selective role of the general
school in the sixties. A famous study conducted in Gorky showed a clear
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

tendency for the upper school (forms or grades) to be filled by the

children of the intelligentsia,4 at the expense of others. The sociologist
N. Aitov, in an article published in 1968, went a step further and showed
that in two of the Kazan' schools which he investigated the children of
white-collar workers got better marks than those of manual workers.5
There is little doubt that a candidate's chances of a VUZ place
improve if he or she has the advantage of private coaching. According
to another of the Gorky studies, about 20% of all first-year students had
enjoyed this, but the incidence was much higher amongst students of
'white-collar' background (see Table 1).
These circumstances would lead one to expect that children from
socially favoured families do better in the VUZ entrance examinations.
No figures have been found on this, but B. Rubin and Yu. Kolesnikov
certainly showed from a 1966/67 sample of first-year students at Rostov
University that there was a distinct shift between the social configuration
of VUZ candidates and that of students accepted. Thus the proportion
of peasants fell from about 15% to 2*5%; the worker candidates lost
some ground, but the proportion of children from the intelligentsia rose
from just over a quarter to a half.6
The overall discrepancy between social group representation in the
student body as a whole and society at large is shown in Table 2. We
have commented upon this elsewhere: suffice it to say here that the Soviet
pattern is quite similar to that which obtains in bourgeois countries,
and seems to have shown a remarkable stability over several decades.
There are, however, three further points to be borne in mind. The
first is that the pattern of social provenance of final-year students and
4
5
G. V. Osipov, Rabochii klass i tekhnicheskii progress (M., 1965), p. 127.
Sotsial'nye issledovaniya (M., 1968), no. 2, p. 190. This is not much of a basis for
generalization, but Aitov would probably not have adduced it if he had doubted its
general
6
validity.
B. Rubin and Yu. Kolesnikov, Student glazami sotsiologa (Rostov na Donu, 1968),
p. 70: an interesting little book which, unfortunately, shows signs of heavy censoring.
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 89
TABLE 1

AVAILABILITY OF PRIVATE COACHING: SURVEY OF FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS OF

GORKY UNIVERSITY, 1967, BY SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Social status!education % of children of given group

of parents having private tuition

Social Group
Employees 25
Workers S
Peasants 0
Educational Level
Higher 36
Middle special 17-2
Middle general (10 classes) 12-9
4-7 classes n.a.
Up to 4 classes 2"5
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

n.a. = not available.

Sow ce: K. N. Minkin, M. G. Sizov, A. A Teretiev, in 'Sotsiologiya i v>
shkola', Uchenye zapiski Gorkovskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, vyp. 100, Seriya
sotsiologicheskaya, torn II (Gorky, 1970), p. 23.
It will be noted that the percentage totals of students by social group and by educa-
tional level of parents do not correspond. This is only to be expected because the
individual entries are not weighted by numbers of students involved, and the figures
should not be added vertically. Thus, while 25% of employees' children had private
tuition, many students did not come from this group, suggesting an overall percentage
lower than this figure, as given in the text.
The 'employee' group contains all white-collar personnel, low-grade office staff
as well as specialists and members of the intelligentsia.

TABLE 2
SOCIAL GROUPS AND THE VUZ STUDENT BODY (%)

Population Student Body

Employees 25 53-1
Workers 55 36-2
Peasants 20 10-7
Sources: Narodnoe khozyaistvo SSSR y ioyo godu (M., 1971), p. 22, and statement
by V. Elyutin, Minister of Higher and Middle Special Education, quoted in The Times,
23 November 1972.

graduates is, in all probability, even less equitable than that of the
student body in its entirety. Some analyses of academic failure suggest
that the students from 'lower-class' families suffer most. Witness the
figures of another Gorky study (Table 3). This is by no means a simple
relationship, of course. Polish studies have suggested that working-class
or rural children who enter higher education adapt to student life much
more slowly, and on thewhole do less well. Someof themsucceed, perhaps
7
because their motivation is stronger than average. Yet the trend of

7
The Poles have advanced far beyond the Russians in investigations of this kind.
See M. Gulda, Proces przystosowania do roli studenta (na przykladzie WSP w Gdańsku
 9
o SOVIET STUDENTS:
TABLE 3
DISTRIBUTION OF OUTSTANDING AND WEAK STUDENTS BY SOCIAL ORIGIN (%)

Social origin Excellent Weak Total

of students Students Students
Employee 55-6 44-4 100
Worker 23-8 76-2 100
Peasant 33-3 66-7 100
Source: T . A. Lependina et al. in 'Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya uchebno-
vospitatel'noi raboty v vysshei shkole', Uchenye zapiski Gorkovskogo Gos. Universiteta,
vyp. 91, 1969, p. 41. This was in effect the first part of 'Sotsiologiya i vysshaya shkola'
(see source of Table 1). See this work, p. 89, for further analysis.

figures in Table 3 seems plausible. N. M. Morozov's investigation of

Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

students in the Moscow oblast indicated an apparent relationship

between income and academic success.8 He produced a curve which
showed that marks on a ten-point scale averaged about 4*5 for students
with a family per capita income of 40-60 rubles a month, and fell to
3 "5 points for students from the 20-ruble category (which was certainly
below the poverty line). He accepted this trend at its face value, and
noted that there was also some deterioration in the marks of students as
they got richer 'because they lacked material incentive to study'.
Another study of 784 candidates for places in Leningrad University in
1967 suggested that candidates whose parents had enjoyed a middle-
special or higher education had a significantly deeper 'professional
orientation', or attitude to their studies, and that, they were also better
prepared for them. Former pupils of full-time day schools (in particular
the so-called special schools where subjects were taught to a higher
level), had a higher cultural level and got better marks than young
people who had studied only in evening and correspondence courses.
The authors of this study also traced a series of distinctions between
candidates in Leningrad itself and in the oblast and raion centres, on
the one hand, and outlying workers' settlements and villages on the
other. There was in practice more opportunity for higher education in
urban centres.9
The second point is that the social composition of the student body
varies much between 'prestige' institutions (like the major universities
or technical institutes in republican centres) and the humbler peda-
gogical and agricultural establishments in the provinces. An illustration
of this is given in Table 4. There are doubtless variations by faculty and

(Warsaw, 1971), p. 25ff.; W. Wiśniewski, 'Przystosowanie do środowiska Uczelnianego',

in Międzyuczelniany
8
zaklad Badań nad szkolnicttvem Wjwtfym (Warsaw, 1969), p. 137.
In Uchenye zapiski Moskovskogo Oblastnogo Pedagogicheskogo Instituta (M., 1968),
torn9 210, 'Nauchnyi kommunizm', vyp. I, p. 118.
G. A. Zhuravleva and Z. V. Sikevich, in Chelovek i obshchestvo (Leningrad), 1969,
no. VI, p. 55.
 S0CI0L0GIC4L PERSPECTIVES 91
locality, which change, like fashion, from year to year. At the very top
of the All-Union league are a few select institutes in Moscow. It is
commonly held, for example, that only the children of the political
elite can aspire to a place in the Moscow Institute of International
Relations, many of whose graduates become diplomats. It is said that
applications for this VUZ require—even to be considered—the counter-
signature of a secretary of the district party committee where the
candidate lives.
TABLE 4
SOCIAL COMPOSITION OF STUDENTS AT SIX BALTIC V U Z Y , 1968
(First-year acceptances to full-time courses, %)
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

VUZ Social Position of Students

Employee Worker Peasant
Medical Institute, Riga II-2
Polytechnical Institute, Riga 4i-9 6-3
Latvian State University, Riga 477 4O-6 n-7
Pedagogical Institute, Daugavpils 3 8-2 37-0 24-8
Pedagogical Institute, Liepaja 27-8 23-2
Agricultural Academy, Kaunas 26-6 38-4 3S*o

Source: 'SotsiaPnye aspekty obrazovaniya', Uchenye zapiski Latviiskogo Gos.

Universiteta, torn 158 (Riga, 1970), p. 20.

Finally, it should be remembered that the pressure on VUZ places

causes well-recognized distortions of the intake procedures, usually in
the form of bribery and corruption.10 Richer parents are often tempted
to apply this method, and instances are sometimes reported in the press.
Political influence can, of course, be as important as money.

The Government Reaction

Such, then, is the observed pattern of student selection in the Soviet
Union. The Soviet leadership has long taken an interest in it, and has
been very aware of the gap between egalitarian theory and inegalitarian
practice. The remedies, however, have varied.
The extensive growth of Soviet higher education which came with
the five-year plans after 1928 inevitably meant the heavy induction into
the VUZy of people of lower social origin, while centralized control made
it easy to promote apparently 'egalitarian' tendencies. There was a need
to turn out a less sophisticated breed of graduates who would take up
new unattractive jobs in uncongenial surroundings, far away from large
towns. Furthermore, Stalin had a deep distrust of old intellectual
families, and favoured poor, 'proletarian' students who would have his
regime to thank for their social advancement. It seems, however, that
10
See, for two examples, Pravda, 29 June 1971, p. 6, Komsomol'skoe znamya, 19
June 1971.
 92 SOVIET STUDENTS:
Soviet-trained specialists began to ensure, from a very early stage, like
education for their children. By the end of the thirties the Soviet student
body was already drawn preponderantly from the 'employee' group, i.e.
mainly the new technical intelligentsia. It could be argued that this was
inevitable in a society consisting of poorly educated masses (as they were
then) and controlled by a government intent on rapid industrialization.
One can find evidence that Stalin secretly favoured this trend: many of
his secondary policies were in fact 'elitist'. The most obvious proof was
the practice (observed between October 1940 and June 1956) of charging
fees for tuition in the upper classes of the 10-year school, in middle-
special educational institutions and in the VUZy themselves.
By the mid-fifties Khrushchev felt compelled to apply some fresh
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

egalitarian pressures. The most obvious of these were the abolition of

fees, new VUZ entry rules which favoured candidates who had spent
two years 'on production', the expansion of evening and correspondence
courses for workers, and an improvement in the day release provisions
for them. In September 1959 he started a scheme whereby individual
enterprises and farms could propose young workers and peasants for
VUZ places on favourable terms; by 1970 just under 4% of the students
were in this category.
These policies must have been popular with less privileged youth and,
though frequently abused, evidently helped some people. The socio-
logist O. I. Shkaratan claimed that between 1963 and 1967 the pro-
portion of Leningrad school-leavers who could not go to a VUZ for
'material reasons' (in other words, poverty) fell from 3i'4% to 7"3%. u
The trouble about the innovations was that by admitting poorly
prepared candidates they tended to lower VUZ standards. There was
considerable opposition to them from the academic community, from
managers who objected to day release schemes, and from the richer
parents.
The Brezhnev leadership introduced some interesting and on the
whole conservative changes. In an important speech to an All-Union
student gathering in October 1971, Brezhnev had nothing to say about
the value of pre-VUZ work experience or the need to expand part-time
enrolments (which had been standard fare under Khrushchev). He did,
however, mention with approval the increase in the number of worker
and peasant students. Changes were now made in the general school
curriculum so as to introduce new elements of differentiation. In
September 1969 special VUZ preparatory courses had been started for
11
O. I. Shkaratan, Problemy sotsial'noi struktury rabochego klassa SSSR, istoriko-
sotsiologicheskoe issledovanie (M., 1970), p. 441. This compares with a figure of about
12% for a sample of high-school seniors in the USA in 1965—if this sort of assertion
means anything (J. Froomkin, Aspirations, Enrollments and Resources (Washington,
D.C., 1970), p. 19).
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 93
young workers and peasants who had little chance of getting a place
without them, and by November 1970 over 20,000 persons were
attending these.12 High quotas for students from rural areas were
discreetly established in pedagogical and agricultural institutes. Workers
and peasants were to be helped—but primarily to get into the less
popular VUZy.
Such in brief were the basic admission policies of the post-Stalin
years. Khrushchev's were clearly 'egalitarian', Brezhnev's more mixed.
One could claim that they all bear a peculiarly 'Soviet' character: such
ambitious social engineering is not frequent outside Soviet-type
societies. As the figures suggest, Khrushchev's egalitarian drive had less
long-term influence on the social composition of the student body than
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

he intended. Given the nature of higher education in Soviet society,

failure was perhaps inevitable. Also, the resilient intelligentsia could be
relied upon to exploit all the administrative difficulties in implementing
unwelcome laws.

Grants and Living Conditions

Soviet students are favoured in that they do not have to pay for their
education. In addition, some 80% of them receive, on a means test basis,
government grants which now range from 40 rubles to 60 rubles a
month. A small percentage of students enjoy larger 'titled' stipendia
for academic prowess. Hostel accommodation is available at nominal
rates, for instance, 70 kopeks a month in the provinces and 1 ruble 5
kopeks in Leningrad (!).13 The system as a whole is a very positive
achievement, and if we here subject some aspects of student living
standards to a critical appraisal it is only to correct over-favourable
interpretations encouraged by Soviet propagandists. Our main conten-
tion is that Soviet students have to put up with more incommodities
than our own undergraduates would ever tolerate. It is important to
bear in mind that living standards in the USSR are much lower than in
West Europe, and probably a third of those in Great Britain. Soviet
students' living standards must be considered in this context.14
A monthly income of some 40 rubles, even with subsidized canteen
food and hostel accommodation, is hardly enough to live on in Russia.
The minimum wage now stands at 60 rubles per calendar month, or a
little less than 15 rubles a week: the categories of workers who receive
this—cleaners, watchmen, typists, etc.—are known to live on the verge
12
Byulleten' Ministerstva vysshego i srednego obrazovaniya, February 1971.
13
A. G. and M. K., former Soviet citizens, who were living in student hostels in
1973.
14
Some observers consider that the gap is about half, but anyone who has experienced
life in Russia might well regard that as over-optimistic.
 94 SOVIET STUDENTS:
15
of penury. Most students have to supplement their income. The more
fortunate get help from their families in the form of parcels and clothes,
and maintenance during the vacation. A significant number actually
manage to do regular jobs while they are studying full-time, this being
quite apart from the tasks organized by the Komsomol in the vacation
(a matter to which we shall return in a moment).
Full-time students who have to work receive but rare mention in
print, yet they deserve special comment. Estimates of their number
vary, but it would probably be reasonable to put it at around 15% of the
full-time student body.16 There are indications that, as might be
expected, these students come from poorer backgrounds.17 They take
jobs with flexible hours which can be fitted into the VUZ timetable.
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

Popular in Moscow are manual loading work at stations and depots,

scene-shifting at theatres, porterage at airfields. Some people take jobs
as night watchmen. Private tuition is attractive, especially for girls,
when pupils can be found.
This in all probability has an adverse effect on their studies. One
of the surveys at the Moscow Oblast Pedagogical Institute indicated
that the time devoted to independent study by students with outside
jobs was only about six hours a week, as compared with a norm of 15-18
hours for other students. Another study suggested that the former
missed many lectures; the extra time obviously has to come from some-
where. There also seems to be a correlation between these practices and
bad examination results.18 Furthermore, these are the students who
suffer most from overwork. An excellent but brief analysis of student
health by I. I. Belyaev in 1970 showed that students who combined
work and study were apparently more subject to nervous strain. But
25% of all students normally did not get enough sleep.19 Those who
had both a full course load and outside jobs would of course be the first
to suffer.
Accommodation is the other major problem, particularly for students
wishing to live away from home. The extreme shortage of living space is
15
A few 1969 prices make this clear: meat 2-3 rubles per kilo; sugar I ruble, butter
3·6 rubles, cheese 2-3 rubles, apples and oranges 1·5 rubles; a man's shirt 7 rubles,
a pair of shoes 30 rubles, a man's suit 120 rubles (Keith Bush, Bulletin of the Institute
for the Study of the USSR, vol. XVII, March 1970, no. 3, p. 15). The minimum wage
is 16
of course gradually being raised to 70 rubles.
Some of the figures available for small samples at the Moscow Oblast Polytechnic
Institute suggested 3-10% according to faculty ('Nauchnyi kommunizm'—see footnote
8 above—p. 32). N. Aitoy gives figures which suggest 20-25 % (Sotsial'nye issledovaniya,
no. 2, p. 191). Figures in a book entitled Lichnost' studenta by Yu. I. Leonavichyus
(Kaunas, 1970) were around 15-20%. This cyclostyled work was consulted in Lenin-
grad, but we have no notes available at the17
time of writing, and further references to it
are18 not specific. Aitov, op. cit., p. 196.
'Nauchnyi kommunizm', p. 32. The best study of examination failure to hand
(though it is fragmentary) is in 'Sotsiologiya i vysshaya. shkola', Uchenye zapiski
Gorkovskogo
19
Gos. Universiteta, vyp. 100, seriya sotsiologicheskaya (Gorky, 1969).
'Sotsiologiya i vysshaya shkola', vyp. 100, pp. 167, 178.
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 95
complicated by the strict system of residence permits which covers all
towns. Every permanent dweller has to be registered with the local
militia, but the militia in many large towns (where VUZy tend to be
concentrated) is usually reluctant to accept newcomers on a permanent
basis unless they already have a) a job (which for students means a VUZ
place) and b) an offer of some form of accommodation. VUZ authorities
usually offer such hostel accommodation as they have to students from
other towns or from the countryside. A sample of just under 1,500
students at four Gorky VUZy showed that 46*1% lived in hostels,
21 "4% with their families and 32'5% in private lodgings.20 A recent
estimate for the country as a whole put the proportion of hostel dwellers
at about one-third of the total.21 The spread is not very different from
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

what we find in Britain, but British standards of accommodation are

undoubtedly higher.22
When the hostels are full, the VUZ authorities may offer a place to a
candidate on condition that he finds his own lodging: without this he
cannot register with the militia and thus legally reside in the town. The
beginning of the academic year, therefore, may see young people from
other localities chasing around for private 'digs' for purposes of both
accommodation and legal registration. Some of them have to be content
with a 'corner' (i.e. part of a room), others may manage for a time with
a fictitious lodging arrangement, so as to get their VUZ papers in order.
Private accommodation of reasonable quality can in fact be extremely
expensive. In Leningrad in 1972 a simple room cost 40 rubles a month,
though in Sambor, L'vovskaya oblast, the rate was ten rubles. The
minimum grant, in fact, went up to 40 rubles a month in that year. It is
probable that many of the students registered as being in private
accommodation in the Gorky study are actually living with relatives or
renting a 'corner' rather than a whole room. The student 'corner' has,
of course, a long pre-revolutionary tradition.23 In Soviet law lodgers are
permitted, within one's own home, but rent income is heavily taxed.
Many individuals prefer to come to undeclared agreements, which is,
of course, in principle illegal. There is some risk of losing rented-out
accommodation when the local soviet checks up on the use of municipally-
owned housing. Though lodgings officers as such are unknown in Soviet
VUZy, there is often an informal system whereby the service staff—
cleaners, catering workers, etc.—offer beds to the needy.
The average hostel-dweller shares a room with from two to ten other
20 21
Ibid., p. 169. P. I. Nikiforov, ibid., vyp. 100, p. 124.
22
Joan Brothers and Stephen Hatch, Residence and Student Life (London, 1971),
p. 51. This study in depth suggests many interesting points of comparison, but a
discussion of them lies beyond the scope of this article.
23
An interesting survey was done by D. Aleksandrov in Kiev as early as 1910,
entitled Studencheskie kvartiry v Kieve (80 pages).
 96 SOVIET STUDENTS:
students, the norm being about four. Foreigners and research students
are usually lodged two per room; the Moscow University hostel on
Lenin Hills, where most students have a room to themselves, is quite
untypical. According to V. Elyutin, the Minister of Higher Education,
the space norm for students in new hostels is 57 sq. m., which is little
below the actual general urban average of 6 sq. m. (the official aim for
all is 9 sq. m.).24 Hostel furnishings are sparse: each student has an iron
bedstead, bedclothes, a bedside table, a chair, a work place at a solid
table and a share in a communal cupboard.23 There are communal
kitchens, wash-rooms, etc., and a cafeteria. Student hostels the writer
has visited in the USSR create an impression of noisy and dilapidated
adequacy. The food, though cheap, is generally poor in quality and
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

sometimes gives rise to complaint. 1.1. Belyaev noted with concern that
only 60% of the students in his sample took care to eat regularly.
No coherent sociological data are to hand on student reactions to
these difficulties. Most students no doubt regard them as normal and
believe that capitalist countries are similar or worse. A few figures are,
however, available on the response to hostel conditions. A sample of
525 hostel students drawn from all nine VUZy in Gorky (but apparently
conducted without preserving anonymity) revealed that 97% of them
were in general satisfied. Perhaps part of the explanation for this
extraordinarily high figure lies in the fact that most persons who
disliked communal living would have chosen a VUZ in their home
town, or found themselves a 'corner' in a private flat. The proportion of
hostel-dwellers who were satisfied with the conditions for study, how-
ever, averaged only 60%. This figure varied from 69% in the hostel of
the Construction Institute to 13% at the Conservatory.28 The fact that
hostel accommodation is offered virtually free of charge is in itself very
disarming.

Attitudes to Higher Education

The desire for higher education in the USSR is widespread, and we
may well ask why. In a country where egalitarian ideas are so strongly
propounded the intense popularity of a degree certificate may seem a
little unexpected. The Soviet authorities depict this popularity as being
due to the rising standard of living and increasing educational oppor-
24
V. Zhitenev et al., Vsesoyuznyi slet studentov (M., 1972), p. 43.
25
As specified in a set of rules for the whole country approved on 3 October 1966.
See L. M. Vidavsky et al., Spravochnik po pravovym voprosam vysshei shkoly (M.,
1969), p. 271.
26
'Sotsiologiya i vysshaya shkola', vyp. 100, p. 130: The percentage of British
students 'very satisfied' with 'hall' accommodation varied considerably from one place
to another, according to the Brothers and Hatch study {op. cit., p. 199), but averaged
34%. Given the disparity of culture and conditions it would be most unwise to read
much into these figures.
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 97
tunities, which encourage Soviet man to improve himself and give more
to his country.
The real explanations probably lie deeper. The intelligentsia in pre-
revolutionary Russia (as in many underdeveloped countries) enjoyed
great prestige, and this attitude to it may in part persist. Other indus-
trialized societies exhibit the same symptoms. Industrialization requires
educated personnel, and the mere availability of education encourages
demand. Education assists upward social mobility. The pattern of job
evaluation amongst Soviet people seems to be similar to what one finds
in some Western societies. The most specialized and well-paid occupa-
tions are highly rated, the commoner trades are much less attractive, and
unskilled labour is least attractive.27
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

It is pertinent to ask not why the phenomenon exists in the USSR,

but what aspects of it are more specifically Soviet. Three come to mind.
First, there is the wide gap in the standard of living between the specialist
and the worker (or peasant). This is expressed not so much in income
differences (though these can be great) as in a higher standard of living,
better housing and shopping facilities, and access to luxuries (like a car,
rest homes) and even party membership, all of which can make life
easier. Secondly, there is the absence of a proper private sector in the
economy. The only employer is the state, or such state-run organizations
as collective farms and retail cooperatives. A degree is virtually essential
for appointment to most posts of substantial responsibility if the
applicant is young and without long experience. The era of the untrained
specialist, or 'praktik', must pass. In contrast to the West, there are no
prospects for the degree-less in trade, or sales organizations or manage-
ment. Finally, it may well be that the closed nature of Soviet society,
and particularly the impossibility of seeking attractive jobs which do not
require a degree abroad, increase the demand for higher education at
home. The problem has not, apparently, been examined in intersocietal
terms by Soviet sociologists. But they have provided some interesting
analyses of Soviet VUZ candidates' motivation.
Figures published on the 'professional' motives of 2,856 students in
Ukrainian VUZy seemed to show that they believed unanimously that
their studies opened up the prospect of 'social advancement', though
28
this term was not denned in the published account. A fairly detailed
retrospective analysis of the motivation of Leningrad students for
entering technical VUZy was recently provided by two Leningrad
scholars from a sample of nearly 4,000 students, and their findings point
in the same direction.29 While 62*2% of the respondents put as their
27
See V. V. Vodzinskaya in G. V. Osipov and Ya. Shchepansky (J. Szczepański)
(eds.), Sotsial'nye problemy truda i proizvodstva (M., 1969), p. 39.
28
Rubin and Kolesnikov, op. cit., p. 76.
29
S. A. Kugel and O. M. Nikandrov, Molodye inzhenery (M., 1971), p. 90.
 98 SOVIET STUDENTS:
main motive 'to obtain higher education'—presumably any higher
education—only 45% said they were moved by an interest in the
speciality chosen; 11 "4% were moved by the desire to improve their
material position. Interestingly, the configuration of these answers
does not seem to have changed over the period 1950-64: it was similar
for full- and part-time students, though the latter had more 'other
motives'. According to Rubin and Kolesnikov, three-quarters of the
students investigated made up their minds about going to a VUZ
between the seventh and ninth classes of the general school, i.e. at the
age of 14 to 16, when they could not know much about academic
work. About half said they were most influenced in their choice by
the mass media, and a third by their teachers.30
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

The motivation of students seems, however, to be linked with both

their social background and the type of VUZ they attend. We have
already commented on better 'professional orientation' among VUZ
candidates from better educated families. One study suggested that a
sense of vocation and the desire to obtain a specialization were more
marked among the better-off students, while the poorer were more
influenced by the demands of their job, the advice of their parents, or
mere chance.31 At the same time, there seems to be a measurable
tendency for the more purposeful students to attend the more attractive
VUZy. S. A. Kugel and O. M. Nikandrov demonstrated on the basis
of their Leningrad survey that the proportion of students who entered
VUZy out of interest for the subjects taught fell from about half in
Leningrad University and the famous Bronch-Bruevich Electro-
technical Institute to a fifth in the Technological Institute of the
Refrigerator Industry and the economics institutes. Other studies have
suggested that the least motivated students of all tended to go to the
agricultural and pedagogical institutes.32
. The attitudes of Soviet students to their studies are by no means
uniformly positive. The Rubin-Kolesnikov survey purports to show
that of a sample of 1,812 students in three Rostov VUZy i2"6% on
average had a negative attitude to their speciality and the educational
institution itself. The same study showed a steady rise over the earlier
courses, with dissatisfaction at its greatest in the fourth or penultimate
year, after which there seems to have been an improvement. This
pattern has been traced elsewhere, but we have not found any study
which attempted to analyse the groups who were least satisfied.
The Leningrad study of young engineers threw more light on the
question of how useful the courses were thought to be from the career
30
831
Rubin and Kolesnikov, op. cit., p. 82; Chelovek i obshchestvo, 1969, No. VI, p. 57.
L. N. Kogan, Molodezh', ee interesy, stremleniya, idealy (M., 1967), p. 273; in
general
32
a very unimpressive piece of work.
Kugel and Nikandrov, op. cit., p. 93; also noted in Lichnost' studenta.
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 99
point of view. Many of these attitudes were no doubt developed while
the respondents were still students. If we divide their answers simply
into positive and negative, we obtain the results shown in Table 5.
TABLE 5
'How far did the study and educational work at the Institute help you to
develop the following qualities?'
% giving the replies
'definitely helped' or
'probably helped'
x. Skill in using scientific literature 89
2. Knowledge of latest technology in given branch 67
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

3. Development of purposefulness and firmness S3

4. Knowledge of production economics ' 51
5. Development of independence in problem-solving 51
6. Knowledge of production and labour organization 49
7. Development of research work skills 46
8. Development of interest in conducting ideological and
educational work, ability to do so 18
9. Development of organizational aptitudes and skills 17
Source: S. A. Kugel and O. M. Nikandrov, Molodye inzhenery (M., 1971), p. 105;
positive responses only shown here. The relationship between 3 and 5 is not, unfor-
tunately, clear from the Soviet text.

An observer of student responses in the West might find this response

very average. From the point of view of the Soviet authorities, who
traditionally adopt a maximalist approach, it is most disappointing. On
the first two points—admittedly the most professional ones—a large
majority of the graduates thought the VUZ courses successful. But only
about half found the courses useful in developing important personal
skills, and knowledge of production, etc. (points 3-7). It is important to
recall that the Soviet VUZ, more than its bourgeois counterparts,
endeavours to turn out specialists already trained to do a certain job;
managerial courses, as we know them, are virtually non-existent.
According to these results, the Soviet VUZ apparently failed to develop
any attachment to ideological work or organizational skills. In these
respects we find the most negative reactions, for only 3-7% of the
respondents gave a fully favourable answer, while no less than 40-47%
said that their courses definitely did not help. Whereas the effectiveness
of teaching the use of technical literature registered +0705 (on a + 1
to — 1 scale), that of imparting organizational skills and an aptitude for
ideological work scored only - 0 4 3 and -
33
A question regarding the adequacy of the courses for professional employment
revealed another set of attitudes, though the relationship with the first set seems to be
complex. Thus, 46% of the respondents thought their specialist training had been
insufficient, and 27% thought they did not have enough general scientific training;
38% thought they were without sufficient engineering skills, and 30% considered they
did not have enough experience of research.
 100 SOVIET STUDENTS:
It would be rash to draw any far-reaching conclusions from these
figures. They cover both management skills and taught courses (e.g.
production economics, labour organization, ideological work) and the
mix, to our mind, is not a happy one. It also contains some apparent
contradictions. But the data do at least indicate some of the strengths
and weaknesses of Soviet VUZ courses from the point of view of the
students, or former students. The overall consensus seems to be that the
VUZy provide a good knowledge of technical literature and technology,
but do not provide sufficient organizational skills, or make 'ideological
work' attractive. To judge from the published account of the survey,
there are some obvious and interesting questions which students were
not asked.
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

Organized Political Activities

The most distinctive aspect of Soviet student politics is undoubtedly
its regimentation; students are strongly encouraged to involve them-
selves in approved political activities, while everything possible is done
to silence unorthodox views. This policy is, of course, a central element
in party control of higher education. Whereas in the West student clubs
and groups of most political hues proliferate, in all Soviet VUZy the
rigidly orthodox Communist Youth League has a monopoly position.
The Soviet student has to demonstrate overt allegiance to the regime.
This is a sphere in which few if any data of a properly sociological
character are available. But let us begin with a brief review of how
political control is administered. In 1971 half of the VUZ staff were
themselves members of VUZ party organizations, and thus directly
subject to party discipline.34 The VUZ Party Committee, or partkom,
has its own office and at least one full- or part-time party worker who is
nominated by the local town or district Party Committee. The VUZ
partkom is an integral part of the administrative structure, taking an
active part in the day-to-day running of the institution. Thus, at the
Faculty of Economics of Moscow University which the writer attended
in 1963, one V. N. Yagodkin was Secretary of the partkom, and also
deputy dean. He in effect ran the faculty by virtue of these posts: his
failings in academic matters were no drawback. The party network also
serves as an extra channel for receiving instructions—from outside
party authorities.
Secondly, as in all Soviet institutions, in a VUZ the party organization
is ultimately backed by the KGB, which can be called in to deal with
serious cases of political dissidence. In large VUZy, especially where
there are many foreigners, the so-called 'first department' may have its
84
V. Elyutin in Zhitenev et al., op. cit., p. 38.
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 101
own office and a permanent or semi-permanent representative. The
Moscow University building on Lenin Hills, for example, which houses
thousands of students, including many Westerners, seems to have a
number of offices and look-out posts.35 Sometimes a 'Foreign Depart-
ment' headed by an official of dubious provenance exists to cater for
foreigners.
Thirdly, political orthodoxy is inculcated through the courses
themselves. The arts subjects—history, literature and economics—are
particularly open to propagandists treatment, but many others—
geography, biology, psychology, etc.—also come under pressure.
Teaching is done from textbooks approved by the Ministry of Higher
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

Education, which also vets the examination questions. The obligatory

courses in topics such as Marxism-Leninism, 'Political Economy' and
CPSU history take up at least 12-15% of the curriculum. We could
justifiably include military training, which takes up one afternoon a week
and several weeks of each summer vacation for male students. The policy
is to turn every able-bodied student into a reserve junior lieutenant by
the time he takes his diploma.
The Komsomol is a fourth channel of control. Official publications
usually avoid giving figures on Komsomol membership among students,
presumably because it is thought to be disappointing. In 1970, to judge
from one source, it was in general about 43%, but figures of 90% are
given for some institutions.36 A few more would be in the party, but
given the degree of politicization of the Soviet VUZ the actual extent of
Komsomol membership is not so important. Presumably the non-
affiliates were good potential students who could find a passable
explanation for their failure to join, or whose families were influential
enough to ensure that they were accepted without such involvement.
Although it has its own committee and organizers (komsorgi, who are
ostensibly elected by the students), the Komsomol is closely supervised
by the partkom. The secretary of the Komsomol is in fact approved by
a superior body. The organization holds general meetings at the faculty
level about twice a semester; group meetings take place more often.
On these occasions, participants' names may be taken in an effort to
ensure good attendances. Frequent absence may bring criticism from
the partkom or the VUZ teachers specially entrusted with political
supervision.
The Komsomol organization is supposed to take an active interest in
students' progress, conduct and leisure activities, all of which may be
35
The KGB occupies, according to popular belief, part of the ninth floor in the
central tower, and rooms near the main entrances. Surveillance of undesirables by
plainclothes men can be assured in any part of the building. It seems likely, however,
that the system in Moscow University is unusually rigorous.
36
A. I. Kamshalov, Ot s"ezda k s"ezdu (M., 1970), p. 25.
 102 SOVIET STUDENTS:
discussed at its meetings: indeed, a member of staff may be specially
invited for the purpose. There is constant encouragement of the students
to study more, but this is sometimes overridden by the promotion of
extra-curricular activities in response to government campaigns. A
fairly standard selection of such activities would be organizing self-
service at students' hostels and in the VUZ itself, giving lectures
(mostly of an ideological character) at local enterprises, and labouring
on collective farms or building sites at low rates of pay.
The extent to which the student body is in fact involved in these
activities, and its reaction to them, is a subject which has been investi-
gated many times by Soviet sociologists. The published results are
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

mostly vague and inconclusive (like much other Soviet political data) but
worth perhaps quick consideration. Rubin and Kolesnikov claimed on
the basis of large samples that, while 90% of all students participated in
some socio-political activities during their years at the VUZ, the
proportion at any given moment was about half. These activities were
loosely defined as 'educative work, giving public lectures, running
circles and groups, membership of voluntary societies, work with
adolescents and active involvement in external VUZ assistance projects',
but the writers provided no definition of 'participation'. The figures for
510 students of Rostov University who participated 'continuously' are,
however, revealing:
Before entering VUZ—57*2% 3rd year of study—240%
1st year of study —39"4% 4 t n y e a r of study—12'6%
2nd year of study —33'°% 5th year of study— 2 8 %
These figures suggest that candidates for VUZ places were particularly
'active'—probably in order to increase their chances of admission.
British sixth-formers may be prompted to broaden their interests for
similar reasons. There was evidently an immediate fall in interest once
the VUZ threshold had been crossed, and a steady deterioration there-
after. In the final year of study hardly any students were heavily engaged
in Komsomol activities, preoccupied as they were with their diploma
dissertations and examinations.
The reasons which, according to the same authors, prompted 600
students of Rostov University to engage in 'social activities' were, in
descending order of rectitude:
J
1. Moral and ideological motives 5'4%
2. Desire to adapt to the collective 300%
3. To promote personal cultural development
and growth iIO%
4. Personality limitations, habit 8x>%
2
5. Obligations imposed 3'4%
6. Other motives 127%
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 103
This breakdown is obviously intended to hide as much as it reveals, but
it admits a surprisingly low level of 'orthodox' motivation and reflects
some compulsion (point 5). No figures were provided to show how the
students rated 'social activities' as opposed to other ways of spending
their time, though data were apparently collected on this. Many other
surveys, however, have shown that these Komsomol-sponsored
activities have a low popularity rating.
According to N. M. Morozov's sample of 1,500 fourth- and fifth-year
students at an unnamed technological institute in the Moscow oblast,
social activities were by far the least popular choice for spending extra
free time (see Table 6).
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

TABLE 6
INVOLVEMENT IN 'SOCIAL ACTIVITIES' (%) AND PARTY-KOMSOMOL MEMBERSHIP

Chosen Activity Party Members Komsomol Members Other Students

Study 89-5 6o-5 50-0

Culture 68-4 66-s 50-0
Sport 42-1 3i-5 357
Amusement 15-7 21-7 21-4
Social Work 5-3 8-6 7-a

Source: N. M. Morozov, 'Svobodnoe yremya i vsestoronnee razvitie lichnosti

budushchego inzhenera', in Uchenye zapiski Moskovskogo Oblastnogo Pedagogicheskogo
Instituta (M., 1968), torn 210, 'Nauchnyi kommunizm', vyp. I, p. 114. The low level
of interest among party members was explained by the writer in terms of their heavy
commitments in other directions.

The attitude of Soviet students to politics in the narrow sense of

Soviet government has not to our knowledge been discussed in any
published Soviet sociological writings. The official position is that the
student body is solidly behind the party in all respects. Many published
data, however, reveal indirectly how unrealistic this assertion is (if such
revelation be needed). Thus, while 9 1 % of a sample of 1,218 students of
Rostov University read 'literary' and 'social' non-specialist journals,
only 36"6% read 'social and political' journals.37 Student readership of
the latter periodicals is strongly orientated towards translations of
foreign articles and foreign affairs, rather than internal matters. In one
VUZ survey the main youth magazine Molodoi kommunist and the
leading party journal Kommunist came fifth and sixth in a list of choices,
with a readership of some io - 5% and io - 2% of the students respectively.
An analysis of the television viewing of 150 students of the Rostov
Institute of Agricultural Mechanics revealed that 'socio-political
problems' came last but one in the selection of preferred programmes.38
37
Rubin and Kolesnikov, op. cit., p. 146. These data, unfortunately, do not appear
to fit some of their other figures.
38
Ibid., p. 149.
 104 SOVIET STUDENTS:
To judge from these surveys, the reaction of most students to
politically orientated activities is one of passive indifference. They
consider the socio-political elements in their courses (to return to an
earlier point) to be of little practical use: they drift out of organized
Komsomol activities; they have comparatively little interest in the
politics of their motherland as officially presented, and concentrate what
political interest they have on the international arena, which is apparently
more absorbing. If this picture is correct, it may reflect a natural
reaction to politically oppressive conditions in the USSR, or a counter-
part to the lassitude of students (extremists apart) in the West.
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

An Example of Political Opposition

Finally, we must add a word on the position of the relatively few
Soviet students who are prepared to criticize the regime overtly. The
matter can be illustrated by taking one well-documented case.39
Andrei Dubrov had been expelled both from school and the Komsomol
for independent and religious views. His hopes of getting a place in the
well-known Moscow Institute for Foreign Languages were dashed when,
according to a friend of his, a Komsomol official personally warned the
VUZ examination commission that even if it awarded him a good mark
Dubrov's application would still be blocked by the League.
Dubrov eventually got a place in the less auspicious Moscow Auto-
Mechanical Institute (MAMI), partly because the rector was an old
family friend. He soon found, however, that two of the Komsomol
members there seemed to know a lot about him and were going out of
their way to gain his confidence. One of them, whom he had known at
school as a very weak pupil, was now getting good marks, and receiving
small sums of money from an undisclosed source. One of this boy's tasks
was to recruit students for Komsomol patrol work. The other friend
tried to get Dubrov to make compromising statements about himself,
and revealed to Dubrov that students who took part in a demonstration
on Pushkin Square on 5 December 1971 had been photographed by the
secret police and subsequently excluded from their institutes. Dubrov
had reason to believe that both of these students were entrusted with the
task of informing on him.
Shortly after the arrest of his godfather, A. E. Levitin-Krasnov (a
well-known figure in dissident circles), Dubrov was summoned to the
deputy dean. This person complimented him on his progress and
promised to get him some translation work, but criticized him for not
being in the Komsomol and for avoiding 'social activities'. Dubrov
concluded that this unsolicited interest could be explained only by
39
Russkaya mysl' (Paris), 12 October 1972; article by Andrei Dubrov, taken from
one of the Samizdat sources.
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 105
political instructions from above. The attentions of his two friends
increased.
Dubrov took exception to compulsory military lectures and field
training and to tasks that had no relation to the VUZ courses, such as
factory or farm work and patrol work in the people's volunteer brigades.
These were in fact virtually obligatory, with nominal or no payment.
(Incidentally, to our knowledge, students' reactions to them have not
been properly investigated.) Another cause of friction was Dubrov's
negative attitude to Marxist-Leninist theory. This was noted by his
teacher who started giving him undeserved low marks. The partkom
made representations to the rector on these grounds to have him
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

excluded. This was not done because, he believed, the KGB wished
to avoid an exclusion scandal at that time. However, in May of his final
year the KGB called Dubrov to Lefortovo prison for questioning. At
the institute his dissertation consultant began to raise difficulties about
his work, though in Dubrov's view this was quite satisfactory. It became
obvious that the consultant had been told not to approve his technical
drawings in order to impede his graduation. Dubrov managed to finish
them alone, but to no avail. Three days before he was due to present
his work he was expelled from the institute, which led to a new series of
difficulties.
This case illustrates the ways in which administrative and political
controls over dissident students are interlinked, and how they function.
The KGB (helped by informers, the Komsomol and the partkom) can
evidently distort the normal function of academic administration to the
extent of reducing a student's marks, depriving him of proper tuition
and even causing his expulsion. If the Soviet student body is passive in
political matters, as the above-mentioned surveys suggest, this is an
obvious explanation. Officially approved activities are uninteresting,
but the student is afraid of indulging in others. The other reasons
plausibly suggested for political indifference are the inscrutability of
Soviet politics, ignorance of the freedom enjoyed by students in the
West, and the fact that most Soviet students think themselves lucky to
have a 'free' education anyway. Dubrov thought that a third of the
students knew about oppositionist tendencies in the USSR, but only
1-2% were involved in them. Some observers might consider this to be
too low an estimate, but there seems to be no way of knowing.

Soviet Students' Attitudes to Employment

For students in the West the final examinations and acceptance of a
degree are the culmination of a college career. This moment has much
the same impact for the Soviet student, but with one outstanding
difference. Soviet higher education is normally followed by state
 106 SOVIET STUDENTS:
placement. Every graduate in principle has to work for three years at a
job allocated by the authorities.
The business of getting a good posting is in some ways as important
as getting a degree. The whole process is supposed to be centrally planned
by Gosplan, the ministries due to receive graduates, and a department of
the Ministry of Higher and Middle Special Education. It is not our
intention to go into the administrative intricacies of the process here.
Suffice it to say that about three months before graduation each student
has to go before a placement commission made up of the VUZ staff and
a representative of the Komsomol. The commission has by then received
from the Ministry of Higher and Middle Special Education a list of jobs
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

roughly equal to the expected number of graduates, but varying in

quality and location. The problem is to distribute them fairly. The best
places seem to be allotted on the basis of academic prowess, personal
suitability, and involvement in Komsomol activities, though the
emphasis placed by the regime on this last has varied over the years.
The regulations allow for special consideration to be given to the
student's state of health, family responsibilities, etc. His wishes may be
taken into account if circumstances permit.
It is not difficult to imagine the kind of unregistered activities which
this situation can provoke. Students who suspect that they may end up
with poor jobs try to get the directors of more desirable enterprises to
submit 'orders' for their services to the placement commissions. Some-
times such students get what is called a 'free diploma', i.e. one which
does not carry a posting. If their parents are influential, these may try
to influence the commission more directly. Students who overtly refuse
jobs offered by the commission have not been subject to prosecution
since 1951, but unpleasant social and political pressures can still be
brought to bear on them. The easiest methods of evasion are to accept
the placement and then find some way of not taking it up, or to work so
badly that the local management offers no objections to release before
expiry of the three-year term.
There is ample evidence that the placement process does not work
very well, and that discrepancies often occur between the stated require-
ments of the economy and the numbers and training of graduates. But
what of the attitudes of the students themselves?
The most detailed analysis we have seen of the employment aims of
students comes from the book by S. A. Kugel amd O. M. Nikandrov.
Their survey of students graduating from technical VUZy in Leningrad
showed that 13% had no particular inclinations; 12% wanted to work
as foremen or technicians; 21% wanted to go into drawing offices and
54% wanted to go into research or university teaching. Moreover, since
1950 the proportion of people who want to go into production seems to
 SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES 107
have been falling, while correspondingly more have been attracted by
research work.40 The drawing board and laboratory, incidentally, had
less appeal for evening and part-time students (who would generally,
but not invariably, have more experience of work on production). The
patterns for men and women were remarkably similar.
Such an orientation matches, in a sense, Soviet schoolchildren's
dislike of manual work, and is familiar in other countries. But it is quite
at odds with the demands of the Soviet economy. An illustration of this
is provided by V. M. Yatsenko's study of first-year Gorky students'
choice of speciality (see Table 7). Many of the first-year students no
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013

TABLE 7
PLACEMENT DESIRES OF FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS COMPARED WITH PLACEMENT
OF GRADUATES IN SAME YEAR (GORKY UNIVERSITY, 1968, %)

Faculty of History Biological Faculty

and Letters
desire placement desire placement
Schoolteacher 18 65*6 o 25*0
Production job 2-6 10-3 5 37-0
Research worker 18 5*8 67-7 5-7
VUZ teacher or research degree 40 2-3 33-0 4-3
Free diploma — 16-0 — 28-0
Totals* 78-6 ioo-o 105-7 ioo-o

'Discrepancies not explained.

Source: 'Sotsiologiya i vysshaya shkola' (see Source of Table 1), p. 42.

doubt changed their plans in the course of their studies, on realizing

that research work was beyond their capabilities. But a significant
discrepancy evidently remained. There is evidence that it was greatest
in the unpopular professions—teaching, agronomy, trade, etc.—and
among students who were likely to be sent out to villages or less
attractive localities. Thus, as far as the students are concerned, the
placement commission must often seem like a bureaucratic barrier to
the attainment of their desires, replacing the 'market' impediments
encountered by young people in other societies.

It is not expedient to draw any far-reaching conclusions from the data

which we have presented here. As indicated at the outset, they illuminate
only a few chosen topics, and then more often than not inadequately.
They do, however, show that the Soviet authorities, despite the vast
strides made in the provision of higher education, have not found
satisfactory answers to a number of major student problems; and that
the prospects of finding answers are frequently remote. The main
40
Kugel and Nikandrov, op. cit., p. 127.
 1o8 SOVIET STUDENTS: SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES
advantage which the Soviet government has over 'bourgeois' govern-
ments in this sphere is the absence of destructive criticism and of
recrimination from the students themselves. But the lack of such
pressure may in the long term be more of a hindrance than a help.

University of Surrey
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 18:28 17 August 2013