How universities sprouted like mushrooms after rain under Soviet rule, only to disappear later

Contents:

• Why many new universities arose after the Bolsheviks arrived
• How the authorities realized that there were too many universities
• How the unnecessary universities were closed
• What happened to the universities of the USSR next

In this article you will get information about…

• what caused the rapid growth in the number of universities in the first, by no means comfortable years after the revolution;
• which new university is located in the building of the former cafe-chantant;
• how the authorities realized that there were too many universities and began to close them;
• in connection with which, a few years later, the number of universities again increased sharply.

Why many new universities arose after the arrival of the Bolsheviks

The opening of new universities in Russia began during the period of the Provisional Government. During this time, steps were taken to establish universities in cities such as Irkutsk, Tashkent, and Rostov-on-Don. However, the real boom in higher education occurred during the Soviet era, when the number of universities increased significantly, contributing to the rise in educational attainment and the development of science in the country.

In the first year after the revolution in Russia, amid a difficult political and economic situation, 16 new universities were opened, including Nizhny Novgorod, Voronezh, Yaroslavl, and Samara. This number exceeded the number of universities existing in the Russian Empire, where there were only 11. By 1920, 162 higher education institutions were operating in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR). It should be noted that this number included not only traditional universities but also specialized educational institutions such as pedagogical and technical institutes. The following academic year, the number of universities increased to 278, tripling the pre-revolutionary level of 91, including private institutions. This growth marked an important step in the development of higher education in Russia in the post-revolutionary period.

New higher education institutions were not only established by the Bolsheviks. For example, universities were established by faculty and students fleeing the Civil War in regions where Soviet power had not yet established itself. For example, universities were founded in Tiflis (Tbilisi) and Baku, which later came under Soviet control as it expanded. These institutions played a vital role in the region's educational system, fostering the development of science and culture in unstable conditions.

The new government showed interest in creating new universities for several reasons. Firstly, the opening of educational institutions contributes to the expansion of educational opportunities for young people, which in turn improves the qualifications of the country's workforce. Secondly, new universities can become centers of innovation and research, facilitating the development of science and technology. Thirdly, increasing the number of universities helps address the shortage of places in educational institutions, providing access to higher education for more students. Furthermore, new universities can contribute to the economic development of regions by attracting investment and stimulating the local labor market.

The Bolsheviks set themselves the goal of making education accessible to all. To this end, they began to dismantle the elite education system that existed before the revolution and began to create a mass school system, including higher education institutions. This task became one of the priorities for the Soviet leadership, since mass education was considered a key element in building a new society.

Mass education played a key role in strengthening the Soviet regime. By educating workers and peasants, most of whom previously had minimal reading and writing skills, the Bolsheviks sought to form a new intelligentsia, unfamiliar with "bourgeois" values ​​and loyal to the authorities. This educational strategy was aimed at creating a loyal and informed population capable of supporting the ideals of socialism and actively participating in the construction of a new society.

Universities were to play a key role in training the personnel necessary for the country's accelerated development. The country experienced an acute shortage of new specialists, such as engineers, doctors, teachers, agronomists, managers, and scientists, who would be loyal to the new government. It was the new universities that were supposed to ensure the mass production of these specialists, acting as a conveyor belt for the development of qualified personnel.

Higher education has always been considered a sign of prestige, as it opens new career horizons. The presence of a university in a city emphasized its status and developed educational opportunities for local residents. Many of those who dreamed of obtaining a higher education back in tsarist times faced restrictions and were unable to realize their ambitions. Opening a university was a complex task for local authorities, requiring significant effort and resources.

After liberation from the administrative control of the tsarist regime, local authorities in districts and county towns began to actively create higher education institutions. As a result, universities were founded in Tiflis, Yekaterinoslav (today Dnepr), and Simferopol. In the European part of the young country, new universities appeared in 44 cities, demonstrating a commitment to education and scientific development in the region.

In both capitals, active development of higher education was also observed: in addition to existing educational institutions, two new universities were opened. In Moscow, Moscow State University No. 2 and Moscow State University No. 3 were founded on the foundations of the previously existing Higher Women's Courses and the private A. L. Shanyavsky People's University. However, it's worth noting that these institutions weren't created from scratch, but rather were transformed from existing non-state educational institutions that didn't have the status of "true" universities. Among the completely new educational institutions, the Moscow Mining Academy, opened in 1919, stands out, making a significant contribution to the development of technical education in the country.

The history of the founding of the Turkestan People's University in Tashkent is vividly described in the memoirs of astrophysicist Professor Vsevolod Stratonov, who was directly involved in this process. In his notes, he recounts in detail how local authorities created a commission that traveled to Moscow. For more than two years, this commission worked in the capital, forming the university's faculty and management staff, as well as procuring the necessary equipment. An important aspect of their work was successful interaction with the People's Commissariat of Education and other central authorities, which contributed to the creation of an educational institution that played a significant role in the region's educational system.

The university's representative office continued its activities for some time after the faculty, with their full equipment, departed on four echelons for Tashkent and began work. Perhaps it was precisely because of this that the university successfully established its functioning in its first years, despite the difficult conditions. The university opened with eight faculties, a significant and ambitious undertaking at the time.

According to Stratonov's memoirs, the commission first initiated the development of an expensive architectural design for the university building. However, in Tashkent, this project was simply postponed, as funding for construction was unavailable under the conditions of the time. As a result, the university was housed in the premises of a former girls' gymnasium, a real school, where conditions left much to be desired, and even in the building of an old cafe-chantant.

While this example illustrates a scenario of significant success, most new universities face limited capacity and resources.

How the authorities realized that there were too many universities

In its early days, the People's Commissariat of Education lacked a clear structure for governing higher education, leading to chaos in the operations of new universities. Some institutions, such as the Moscow Mining Academy, adhered to the avant-garde ideas of the People's Commissariat of Education, replacing traditional faculties with scientific, educational, and outreach sections. Meanwhile, other institutions, such as the Kazan Polytechnic Institute, retained pre-revolutionary structures with faculties and collegial governance. This heterogeneous approach to organizing higher education reflects the complex changes in the educational system of the time.

The People's Commissariat of Education was inconsistent in its decisions. In September 1922, the department decided to liquidate Smolensk University, but reversed its decision the following month. Maintaining a large number of universities required significant financial investment, which the new government lacked amid the post-war devastation, the struggle against the White movement, and foreign intervention. As a result, the universities that had been opened were unable to survive for long and gradually closed, lacking adequate resources and the ability to pay faculty salaries. These circumstances led to a significant reduction in the number of educational institutions, which negatively impacted the level of higher education in the country. The issue of classroom space became extremely pressing. Due to the lack of buildings, organizing a full-fledged educational process became impossible. The Kazan Polytechnic Institute, founded on the site of an industrial school, was forced to share its premises with a hospital, which was established after Kolchak's offensive, as well as with a school and the North-Eastern Archaeological Institute. This occurred against the backdrop of a significant increase in the number of students, which significantly complicated the educational process and reduced its quality.

In winter, classrooms were often left without heat. In May 1920, the rector of the Kazan Polytechnic Institute reported that the university was unable to prepare for either the expected famine or the onset of the heating season. The situation highlights the serious problems with providing for the educational process in the face of a lack of resources.

Obtaining books and the necessary equipment was extremely difficult. Old textbooks were not reprinted, since their content was contrary to the spirit of the revolution, and funding was limited. New teaching materials had not yet been created. While established universities could utilize their existing library stocks, new educational institutions had to source scarce materials from scratch. This created additional difficulties in the educational process and limited students' access to up-to-date information.

Astrophysicist Professor Vsevolod Stratonov recalled that in 1918, the commission responsible for establishing the Turkestan People's University immediately began purchasing books during a trip to Moscow. This demonstrates the importance of educational resources in the formation of the new institution and underscores the commitment to developing science and education in the region. The purchase of books became a fundamental step toward the establishment of the university, which subsequently played a key role in the intellectual and cultural enrichment of Turkestan.

At that time, books disappeared without a trace. They could only be purchased at the only official bookstore permitted by the Soviet government—the "Pisateley Shop." It was here that Alexandrov primarily purchased his books, and also occasionally consulted private libraries.

One of the main problems in education in the early years of Soviet power was the shortage of qualified teachers. This situation arose as a result of the emigration of many academic intellectuals, as well as the participation of some scientists in the White movement. Some of them did not survive the harsh conditions of the time, including famine and social upheaval. Increasing the number of capable specialists in a short period of time proved impossible. It is important to note that postgraduate studies, designed to train personnel for higher education institutions, were introduced in the USSR only in 1925, which also contributed to the shortage of teachers.

Read also:

Institutes of the Red Professorships: History of Opening and Closure

The Institutes of Red Professorship were established in the Soviet Union in 1921 with the aim of training highly qualified teachers and researchers for the new socialist realities. These institutions were an important step in the development of Soviet education, as they combined theory and practice, providing training for specialists capable of working in a rapidly changing society.

From their founding, the Institutes of Red Professorship played a key role in creating an education system oriented toward the ideals of socialism. They trained not only future teachers but also researchers, who later made significant contributions to the development of various fields of science and technology.

However, by the late 1930s, changes related to the political situation in the country began. The Institutes of Red Professorship began to be criticized and closed. The reasons for this were both internal problems in the education system and external factors, including political repression. In 1939, most of the institutes were liquidated, and their functions were integrated into other educational institutions.

The closure of the Red Professors' Institutes marked a significant milestone in the history of Soviet education. Despite the changes in the system, many graduates continued their careers in teaching and research, contributing to the development of the country and its educational system. Thus, the history of the Red Professors' Institutes remains a significant part of the legacy of Soviet education and illustrates the complex path of educational development under political change.

Those who remained in Russia managed to survive and continue working, but faced delays in salary payments, sometimes lasting several months, which was especially difficult during hyperinflation. Academic food rations were one and a half to two times less than those for those working in other fields. The situation reached the point that university professors were forced to take part-time jobs at the port and elsewhere to support themselves. It's not surprising that some of them abandoned their primary professions entirely.

According to various sources, the number of university staff members decreased by 1.5-3 times. Even the number of department heads at universities became insufficient.

Missing faculty members were often replaced by acting assistants, or "vridasas." These assistants were typically selected from among senior students, which ensured the educational process was maintained. Thus, universities were able to maintain the quality of education and ensure the continuity of the educational process, even in the face of staff shortages.

In some cases, the situation was rectified by the use of "shift workers"—professors from the capital who traveled to the regions on specialized trains designed for their needs.

In his memoirs, Stratonov mentioned that many Moscow professors who agreed to work at the newly created Turkestan University and even received a salary when the university existed only on paper ultimately refused to move to Tashkent when the time came. This created the urgent need to find replacements among young specialists. This development caused disappointment both among local authorities and prospective students, who had hoped to attract renowned scholars from the capital. The situation highlights the challenges faced by regional educational institutions seeking to attract qualified personnel.

All of the aforementioned issues also affected traditional universities, but their established foundations and established staff made it easier for them to overcome these challenges than for newer institutions.

The situation with students was complex. In August 1918, the Bolsheviks, seeking to make higher education accessible to the masses, changed the admission requirements for universities. This change had its positive aspects, such as the abolition of gender and nationality qualifications for applicants and the introduction of free higher education. However, the decision was controversial, as it effectively mandated the admission of all applicants without entrance examinations and regardless of their basic educational level. This could have negatively impacted the quality of education, which subsequently led to various problems in the higher education system.

Between 1918 and 1920, many students and auditors enrolled in higher education. Organizing a full-fledged educational process for such a large number of people, many of whom lacked the necessary preparation to master complex knowledge, proved an extremely difficult task. The crowds of students soon dispersed, as many dropped out due to a lack of understanding of the material. Others, caught in poverty, devastation, and the Civil War, also quickly lost interest in education. As a result, in 1925, only 10% of those who entered completed their studies at universities. This indicates a difficult situation in the country and the influence of socio-economic factors on the level of education.

Read also:

The Soviet government decided to cancel competitions for admission to higher educational institutions. This step was aimed at simplifying access to education and removing barriers for young people. However, it soon became apparent that this measure led to a decline in the quality of applicants and, consequently, education as a whole.

As a result, the government recognized the need to return to a competitive system to select the best-prepared students. This decision contributed to raising the level of education and ensuring higher-quality training of specialists necessary for the country's development. Thus, the return to competitive admission to universities became an important step in improving the educational system and training of personnel in the Soviet Union.

Despite the relatively small proportion of graduates, it soon became clear that their number exceeded the country's needs. In 1923, reports began appearing in the Soviet press that universities were graduating with too many technical specialists who were unable to find suitable employment. This situation highlighted the problem of overproduction of personnel in technical fields, which negatively impacted the economy and the labor market. The need for educational reform and the adaptation of curricula to employer demands has become more pressing to ensure graduates are employable and their skills meet modern requirements.

A year earlier, Nikolai Semashko, Minister of Health of the RSFSR, stated that the training of medical specialists in higher education institutions was being too intensive, disregarding actual resources. In the early years of Soviet power, universities began training doctors en masse to assist the wounded at the front and combat the typhus epidemic. However, with the end of the war and the elimination of the epidemic, the need for such a large number of students diminished.

In 1924, at a party congress, Nikolai Bukharin confirmed that the USSR had a surplus of specialists in engineering and medicine, while there was a shortage of teachers and agricultural workers. In 1925, at meetings of higher education institution leadership, he openly voiced the government's intention to "consolidate" the university network. This points to the need to rethink educational policy and develop new approaches to training personnel in areas of shortage.

The Soviet leadership aimed to integrate higher education into the planned economy. In this context, the existence of several universities with identical faculties was perceived as duplication of functions and evidence of the inefficiency of the educational system. Optimization of the university network was considered necessary to improve the quality of personnel training and more rationally allocate resources within the country.

The People's Commissariat of Education was also significantly influenced by the idea that higher education institutions exclusively educated the intelligentsia, perceived as a class enemy. Consequently, it became necessary to reduce the number of "enemy breeding grounds." This approach reflected a desire to control the educational system and develop an ideologically correct student body.

How Redundant Universities Were Closed

In the 1922/1923 academic year, the authorities began the process of liquidating unprofitable universities. This decision was part of a broader reform of the educational system aimed at optimizing higher education and improving its quality. The closure of ineffective educational institutions made it possible to concentrate resources on more promising universities, which in turn contributed to raising the standard of education in the country.

In 1922, the government began transferring funding for most higher education institutions to regional budgets, which were also suffering from a lack of funds. The rejection of already modest state funding became a real disaster for universities. The closure of universities, deprived of state support, was only a matter of time. Some educational institutions struggled to survive, appealing for funding from various authorities and holding out longer, while others closed almost immediately. This situation significantly impacted the country's educational system, causing the loss of many academic traditions and knowledge.

Forced liquidations of universities were carried out as follows: a group of inspectors would arrive in the city with the task of closing as many educational institutions as possible. An inspection would begin, and often it was not necessary to search for grounds for closure for long, as most universities had insufficient equipment, lacked qualified personnel, and graduated very few specialists. Following the inspection trip, officials would draw up recommendations for the closure of specific universities, which were sent either to local authorities or to the Ministry of Education, where measures to liquidate the educational institutions were already being taken.

In 1924, an inspection of the Kazan Polytechnic Institute was conducted, the results of which were documented in a report. This report contains important data on the state of the educational institution, its infrastructure, and educational processes. The inspection identified key issues related to both the material and technical infrastructure and the quality of teaching. Such historical documents help us understand the development of the educational system in Russia and its impact on modern educational institutions.

The institute is not fit for purpose and does not meet the requirements of modern higher education. Its equipment leaves much to be desired, and the level of staff qualifications is seriously questionable. The diploma projects, although completed conscientiously, do not meet modern standards and represent an outdated architecture. This approach to the educational process in Kazan has led to a negative attitude towards the institute's graduates. Engineers graduating from its walls are often viewed with bias, and the institute is jokingly referred to as a semi-technical rather than a polytechnic. This underscores the need for significant changes in the curriculum and approaches to specialist training.

As a result of the reform, universities in Smolensk, Yaroslavl, Samara, and Astrakhan were closed. Meanwhile, some educational institutions did not close, but rather underwent a process of optimization, merging into one. For example, MSU-3 was merged with the first MSU, and all three Petrograd universities were united into a single institution.

Some universities were transformed into institutions of secondary vocational education. For example, the Kazan Polytechnic Institute became a technical school. The audit commission's report stated that, given the existing equipment and the weak student body, it would be more expedient to reorganize the institute into a technical school, since it had no prospects as a university. It is noteworthy that just five years earlier, the Kazan Polytechnic Institute had been created on the basis of a technical school. Interestingly, a few years after being transformed into a technical school, in 1929, it again received the status of an institute, and was then divided into two: the Kazan Chemical-Technological Institute and the Institute of Municipal Construction. These changes reflect the fickle policy of the authorities in the field of education.

The closure and merger of universities did not affect all new educational institutions. For example, the universities in Tashkent and Baku successfully survived this period. Tashkent University, founded in 1923, was renamed from Turkestan University to Central Asian University, and Baku became known as Azerbaijan State University in 1924. These educational institutions received significant funding from local authorities, which contributed to their stable development. The establishment of universities was systematic and thorough, not spontaneous. The first rector of Turkestan University, according to Stratonov, skillfully attracted donations and loans to support the educational process. These republics also experienced a shortage of educated specialists, confirming the need for universities and their important role in the region's educational system.

As a result of the policy of closing and merging higher education institutions, the number of universities decreased significantly: in 1922, there were 248, and in 1925, only 145 remained. In subsequent years, until the late 1920s, the number of universities remained stable. A new stage of growth only began with the 1928/1929 academic year.

Freed faculty members were sent to work at the remaining universities, where students also went to complete their education. However, not everyone had this opportunity, as the authorities began to implement a policy of student purges. Those considered politically unreliable, that is, those who did not have the necessary proletarian origins, as well as those who were lagging behind in their studies, were expelled. These measures have significantly affected the educational process and reduced the level of academic preparation in higher education institutions.

What happened to universities in the USSR next?

Despite its shortcomings, the educational policy of the first years of Bolshevik rule produced significant results. During the first ten years of Soviet power, the number of students tripled, although only a few of those enrolled in the early years went on to graduate. As a result, higher education became a real social elevator, opening up new opportunities for many citizens. This transformation of the educational system played a key role in the formation of a new society and contributed to the development of the intelligentsia, which subsequently influenced various spheres of the country's life.

The history of higher education is often marked by unsuccessful experiments, especially in the area of ​​university structure. In the early 1930s, a tendency toward fragmentation of educational institutions was observed, associated with attempts to introduce strict specialization, similar to industrial methods. This was aimed at overcoming the perceived inflexibility of the education system. However, such changes did not always produce the expected results, highlighting the complexity and multifaceted nature of reforms in higher education.

The humanities faculties of Leningrad University were separated into a separate institution—the Leningrad Historical and Linguistic Institute. Nizhny Novgorod University was divided into six separate institutes. Similar processes were observed at other educational institutions. For example, the Moscow Mining Academy was divided into six new institutes, among which such institutions as the Ordzhonikidze Russian State Geological Prospecting University, the Gubkin Russian State University of Oil and Gas, and the National University of Science and Technology MISiS remained. Some universities were transferred to other regions, which also became part of the general trend towards decentralization of higher education in Russia.

In some universities, the number of faculties was reduced to two or three. This led to a significant increase in the total number of higher education institutions, which increased three to fourfold. While there were 190 universities in the country in 1929, their number had increased to 579 in 1930, and by 1932, it had reached 832. This fragmentation of educational institutions was a consequence of changes in the educational system and the needs of society. Despite the formal division, the universities continued to use the same premises, but the distribution of property was not always fair. For example, when the Voronezh Agricultural Institute was separated, the new Chemical Institute received full control over all laboratories, while the Poultry Institute was given only eight benches, a corridor, and a shared auditorium with the Institute of Mechanization. This situation highlights problems in resource management and a lack of transparency in the distribution of assets between educational institutions.

Since 1931, the restoration of the old structure of higher education institutions began, but the process was not fully completed.

Funding for education has long left much to be desired. In 1928, Anatoly Lunacharsky expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that 150 million rubles were allocated for the development of the coke industry, despite the lack of domestic specialists in this field. As a result, the country had to attract expensive experts from Germany. Lunacharsky emphasized that just two million rubles invested in training domestic specialists would have yielded a much faster return on investment. Efficient resource allocation in education is key to developing the country's human resources potential and increasing its competitiveness in various industries.

By the late 1930s, the USSR had practically achieved self-sufficiency in providing personnel with higher education. This became possible thanks to the policy of universal primary and then secondary education. The number of knowledge workers, that is, specialists, tripled. Although this growth did not always correspond to the quality of training, for a country that until recently had a high level of illiteracy, this was a significant achievement.

Primary sources of information play a key role in forming knowledge and understanding of various topics. They can include books, scientific articles, specialized journals, and online resources. When choosing sources, it is important to consider their relevance, reliability, and authority. High-quality sources ensure the accuracy and completeness of information, which is especially important in the context of rapid technological development and constant change in various fields. Using trusted sources helps avoid the dissemination of unreliable data and promotes a more in-depth analysis of the issues under consideration. The correct approach to choosing information sources allows you to build well-founded arguments and make informed decisions.

• Avrus A. I. History of Russian Universities. — M., 2001.
• Andreev D. A. Proletarianization of Higher Education: the New Student as an Instrument of Educational Policy // Schedule of Changes: Essays on the History of Educational and Scientific Policy in the Russian Empire — USSR (late 1880s — 1930s). — M., 2012.
• Berlyavsky L. G. The Role and Functions of the People's Commissariat of Education // Schedule of Changes: Essays on the History of Educational and Scientific Policy in the Russian Empire — USSR (late 1880s — 1930s). — M., 2012.
• Demidova E. I., Zakharov A. V., Efimova E. A. Institutionalization of Soviet Higher Education in Russia in the 1920s // Archivist's Bulletin.
• Ivanov A. E. Students of Russia in the Late 19th — Early 20th Century. Social and Historical Destiny. — M., 1999.
• Kuzminov Ya. I., Yudkevich M. M. Universities in Russia: How it Works. — M., 2021.
• Rozhkov A. Yu. Among Peers: The Lifeworld of a Young Man in Soviet Russia in the 1920s. — M., 2014.
• Savin A. I. Higher Education in the RSFSR as a Social Mobility Elevator (1918–1936) // Humanities in Siberia.
• Safronov P. A. “To Sensitively Reflect All the Demands of the Revolution”: The Soviet University in the 1920–1930s // Issues of Education.
• Slavko T. I. Principles of Formation of the Soviet Higher Education System and Social Consequences of Its Functioning in the 1920s — Early 1930s. // The era of socialist reconstruction: ideas, myths and programs of social transformation. - Ekaterinburg, 2017.
• Stratonov V. V. On the waves of life. Volume 2. - M., 2019.
• Tikhonov I. L., Zhukovskaya T. N. How they entered university 200 years ago // St. Petersburg University.
• Williams K. In the fight against elitism: the proletarianization of science in Russia in 1917-1953 // Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series "History and Philology".