"The Unified State Exam Generation": Is it true that schools are teaching worse after the introduction of the Unified State Exam?

Contents:

• The Unified State Exam — pure evil? A lot of emotions and little data
• Is it possible to evaluate the impact of the Unified State Exam objectively?
• How do those who entered with the Unified State Exam study at university?
• How have school lessons changed in the years since the introduction of the Unified State Exam?

In this article, you will become familiar with the key aspects of the topic. We will consider in detail the main points that will help you better understand the material and apply the acquired knowledge in practice. Read on to learn more.

• How opponents of the Unified State Exam explain their positions;
• How the first "Unified State Exam generations" coped with their studies at universities;
• Which school subject suffered the most from the introduction of the Unified State Exam;
• What changes to the Unified State Exam are proposed by those who do not expect it to be abolished.

Every year, sociological studies confirm that a significant portion of the Russian population perceives the Unified State Exam (USE) as a negative phenomenon. According to a survey conducted by the SuperJob portal this year, 68% of respondents supported the abolition of the USE. The main complaints about the exam remain unchanged and coincide with the opinions of participants in a similar VTsIOM survey conducted two years ago: preparation for the USE involves cramming and practicing specific types of problems, which does not contribute to the development of deep knowledge in students. This situation is causing concern among educators and parents, who note that the Unified State Exam (USE) does not reflect the true educational needs and abilities of schoolchildren.

The State Duma reflects the opinion of voters. Deputy Speaker Pyotr Tolstoy noted that the Unified State Exam forces students to spend years memorizing correct answers and filling out forms, resulting in schools graduating underprepared specialists. Maxim Zaytsev, Chairman of the State Duma's relevant committee, also expressed the opinion that the USE system has failed and should be abolished. In his opinion, the USE focuses students not on acquiring knowledge, but on achieving high scores, which negatively impacts the quality of education.

What's really happening to knowledge? In the modern world, knowledge is becoming an integral part of our lives, influencing personal and professional development. We constantly receive new information, but it is important to understand how it is processed and stored. Scientific research shows that knowledge is not simply stored in our consciousness but is also subject to change, affecting our perception and understanding.

With each new experience and each new piece of information, our knowledge can be transformed, refined, or even replaced. This process is called cognitive adaptation. The more we learn and develop, the more knowledge we integrate into our lives. It is important to remember that the learning process never ends, and the constant pursuit of knowledge helps us remain competitive in a rapidly changing world.

Thus, understanding the dynamic nature of knowledge and its significance in our lives becomes key to successful personal and professional growth.

The Unified State Exam - Pure Evil? Too Much Emotion and Not Enough Data

Negative reviews of the Unified State Exam (USE) can be found on social media, in media comments, and in survey results. Their opinions are usually based on personal experience and observations. Such criticism highlights existing problems and shortcomings in the system, sparking active debate among the educational community and parents.

In 2012–2013, researchers at the Higher School of Economics conducted surveys at nine Russian universities. A significant number of respondents cited a decline in the quality of school preparation as a consequence of the introduction of the Unified State Exam (USE).

Recently, an increasing number of school graduates have been contacting us, and students' knowledge levels continue to decline. Teachers note that test-based exam preparation does not foster the development of creative thinking and oral communication skills. Overall, schooling is focused on passing exams rather than on deep understanding of subjects and acquiring knowledge. This creates serious problems for students' further education and professional growth, as a lack of critical thinking and communication skills can negatively impact their future careers. The education system needs to be reoriented toward developing students' creative and analytical skills so they can successfully adapt to the modern world.

Interviews and focus groups with teachers from Moscow and Rostov-on-Don, conducted in 2017–2018, reveal widespread negative attitudes toward the Unified State Exam (USE). According to teachers, the main problems with the exam are its standardization, which assumes a one-size-fits-all approach instead of taking into account the individual needs of students. They also note the emphasis on the speed of assessment and the number of exams administered, which negatively impacts their quality. Teachers consider the test-based format of knowledge assessment to be alien and borrowed, which further fuels feelings of rejection and dissatisfaction.

The positions of university and school teachers point to the need to address this important issue. This could stimulate the scientific community to conduct research on changes in the levels of intelligence, critical thinking, creativity, as well as specific subject knowledge and skills of graduates since the introduction of the mandatory Unified State Exam. However, there is a lack of direct data necessary for such research.

There is no database that allows for a comparison of the IQ of school graduates in 2000 with the results of graduates in 2020. No systematic measurements of the creativity of Russian high school students have been conducted for many years. Graduation and entrance examinations at different schools and universities before the introduction of the Unified State Exam varied significantly, making it impossible to use these results for comparative analysis.

Publications by opponents of the Unified State Exam, even if they are presented as scientific articles, remain merely expressions of the opinions and personal positions of experts. Most of the arguments in such emotional statements are based on references to the opinions of other specialists. When the authors attempt to rely on quantitative data, it is insufficient to support broad conclusions. This highlights the need for a more thorough analysis and critical approach to the information presented in discussions about the Unified State Exam.

A study conducted by Tyumen State University and Tyumen Industrial University analyzed the results of a creative thinking test among 300 current students in grades 9–11 who took the test in 1994. The results showed that the students' originality scores were lower. The book cited by the authors only provides average grade scores and information that 500 Moscow schoolchildren aged 6 to 17 participated in the study. However, it is unclear what proportion of this sample represented high school students and which specific students participated in the testing. Researchers in Tyumen suggest that the decline in creativity may be related to the clip-based thinking of today's youth and the way students prepare for tests and exams in high school. However, unfortunately, there is no precise data to confirm these hypotheses.

Is it possible to assess the impact of the Unified State Exam objectively?

Changes in the quality of school education in Russia after the introduction of the Unified State Exam can be analyzed based on data from international studies. Russian schoolchildren participated in such studies before the introduction of the mandatory Unified State Exam. In particular, they have participated in the TIMSS international monitoring study of the quality of school mathematics and natural science education since the first testing in 1995. Russian students also participate in the PISA international educational assessment program, which was launched in 2000, and in the PIRLS international study of reading comprehension and literacy, which began in 2001. These studies provide valuable information about the dynamics of educational results and the quality of school education in Russia.

Unfortunately, there is no information for direct comparisons in the studies. The extended version of TIMSS is administered only to high school graduates, while other tests are targeted at younger students. It is unlikely that the USE (Unified State Exam) will be scheduled in 7-10 years' time will significantly impact reading instruction in elementary school. The PISA test, administered to ninth-grade students, provides some information about the current state of education. For example, the lower results of Russian schoolchildren in 2018 compared to 2015 may be due to the Russian school curriculum's emphasis on memorizing facts and completing tasks based on a model. PISA tests measure the ability to apply knowledge in real-life settings, and experience shows that Russian ninth-graders who actively prepare for the OGE (Basic State Exam) with standardized tests may not be ready. However, this assumption remains a hypothesis that requires further confirmation through empirical research.

Most researchers analyze the impact of the USE using indirect data. For example, they compare high school graduates' exam results with their success in universities. Another approach is to study changes in the educational process in schools. This analysis allows for a more thorough understanding of how the Unified State Exam influences the educational system and the quality of student learning.

How do those admitted with the Unified State Exam perform at university?

Research aimed at assessing the relationship between Unified State Exam scores and first-year students' success at universities began immediately after the introduction of the mandatory exam. If there is indeed a correlation between high Unified State Exam scores and academic performance at university, this may indicate that the ability to perform well on the Unified State Exam is linked to academic success at a higher education institution. Such studies are important for practical application, as they help determine whether the Unified State Exam (USE) score can be used as a university entrance exam and how accurately it reflects the academic abilities of graduates.

A large study conducted by the Higher School of Economics (HSE) covered a sample of 19,000 students who entered Russian higher education institutions between 2009 and 2011. The results showed that the overall USE score does predict students' academic performance in their first year of university. This was true for all faculties. However, the predictive power of this indicator turned out to be limited: the authors of the study characterized it as "acceptable" but stable.

Previously and in subsequent years, various research groups continued to study the relationship between the USE score and student academic performance at universities. Several studies have established a correlation between the results of the Unified State Exam (USE) and the academic success of first-year students. These studies highlight the importance of the Unified State Exam as an indicator of future educational performance and can serve as a basis for further analysis of the impact of examination results on the level of student preparation in higher education institutions.

• For students who entered the International Institute of Economics and Finance at the Higher School of Economics in 2009–2011, USE scores were able to predict academic performance ratings after the first, second, and, to some extent (for exams in English and mathematics, but not in Russian), third years. Moreover, students who entered the university based on Olympiad results, and not just the Unified State Exam, showed higher ratings in all three years.
• A similar picture—that the Unified State Exam score can predict a student's success, but Olympiad winners perform better—was observed during the same years at the Chemistry Department of Moscow State University.
• From 2014 to 2016, at the Yaroslavl State Medical Institute, Unified State Exam scores in chemistry, biology, and Russian were quite effective in predicting a student's academic rating at the end of their first year.
• In 2015, authors from Petrozavodsk State University, using four years of data, not only demonstrated a link between Unified State Exam scores and academic performance at the university, but also proposed using this finding in practice. In their opinion, it is worth identifying first-year students admitted with the lowest USE scores as "risk groups" and offering them additional classes.
• A 2017 study at Saratov Technical University yielded the same result: the sum of USE scores predicted the average first-year grade.

Not all studies confirm that graduates with high USE scores become successful students. Unified State Exam results are not always a reliable indicator of student potential in various forms of education. This may indicate that other factors, such as motivation, self-organization skills, and critical thinking abilities, play a more significant role in student success. It is important to keep in mind that a high USE score does not guarantee a deep understanding of the subject or the ability to apply knowledge in practice.

• At the Ural Medical University, USE scores were compared with grades in the anatomy course in 2014-2015. And not all students had a correlation between these parameters. For first-year students enrolled in targeted programs funded by the local budget, USE scores did not predict academic performance at the university at all.
• No correlation was found between USE scores and academic performance at the School of Advanced Studies at Tyumen State University. Only first-year students with the lowest USE scores had problems at the university. For those who entered with decent scores, USE scores did not predict subsequent success.

One possible reason for the USE's low informative value may be the university's unique educational system. For example, the School of Advanced Studies implements a liberal education model, where undergraduate students are given the opportunity to choose their major only after their second year and independently create about a third of their curriculum. Under these conditions, the USE does not reflect the qualities necessary for successful learning, making it less informative. The situation is similar at medical universities: USE scores are often not an indicator of real chances of admission, especially in the context of targeted admissions. This highlights the need for more flexible and adequate methods of assessing applicants that truly meet the requirements of the modern educational process.

However, there is another aspect: the Unified State Exam in Mathematics annually provides extremely limited information on how successfully a graduate will be able to study in technical or other specialized specialties.

• An attempt in 2014 to find out whether those who received a high score on the Unified State Exam in this subject would have higher grades in mathematics at the university did not yield any results.
• Data from 2019 from another university confirms that the exam does not provide information for subject predictions: the Unified State Exam score in mathematics and the grade for the exam in the same subject at the end of the first year are not related.
• In a 2018 study, the authors concluded that first-year students with both 70 and 90 points on the Unified State Exam in Mathematics demonstrate approximately the same level of real mathematical competencies - worthy only of an assessment "satisfactory."

How have school lessons changed in the years since the introduction of the Unified State Exam?

The results of the Unified State Exam in mathematics raise serious doubts and point to potential problems in the teaching of this subject in schools. It is important to understand when exactly these difficulties began and how the Unified State Exam may have affected the quality of mathematics education. An analysis of the current situation shows that low exam scores may be the result of ineffective teaching methods and insufficient teacher training. It is necessary to consider how reforms in the education system, including the introduction of the Unified State Exam, have affected the level of knowledge and skills of students in mathematics.

• In a 2008 interview (before the introduction of the mandatory Unified State Exam), Grigory Kantorovich, then Vice-Rector of the Higher School of Economics, stated that the poor Unified State Exam results in mathematics (23% of graduates did not score a C) showed that "we need to take secondary school seriously."
• After 2010, according to Anatoly Ivanov, a teacher at the Perm branch of the Higher School of Economics, it was possible to score 50 points on the Unified State Exam in mathematics with a fifth-grade knowledge of the subject. Since 2015, according to Ivanov, the basic level of the mathematics exam has given schools the freedom "not to teach and not to learn." "Teaching mathematics to first-year students is very difficult, as they are only trained to solve the first 9-10 problems of the Unified State Exam," he noted. Yuri Neretin, professor of the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics at Moscow State University, expressed a similar position in 2016, based on an analysis of the problems in the specialized Unified State Exam in mathematics. Most of the problems at that time, in his opinion, were primitive "one-move solutions" that did not require any logical effort to solve. The most difficult problems from Part C of the Unified State Exam in specialized mathematics corresponded to the level of the best specialized universities and mathematics schools. Yuri Neretin's conclusion was disappointing: "Mathematics in schools, with the exception of specialized schools, cannot exist with such an examination program." Because there's Section B, where there's nothing to teach or learn, and Section C, at a level where it's impossible to teach."
• In 2017, Khakass State University, after comparing the results of the Unified State Exam and the first university exam in mathematics, decided that first-year students needed an introductory course in school mathematics to enable them to successfully study in the natural sciences or technical programs.
• In 2018, staff at Bauman Moscow State Technical University assessed the situation slightly more favorably: they found a correlation between the Unified State Exam score in mathematics and the results of the entrance test for the subject at the university. That is, in general, the better the Unified State Exam, the better the first-year student performed on the university exam. But there were also, the article states, strange cases: "Applicants with high USE scores often have a superficial knowledge of the subject and are unable to solve the basic-level tasks presented to them during the entrance testing."

The authors of studies criticizing the USE in mathematics unanimously assert that this exam has a negative impact on school education. As a result, the emphasis shifts to the rote memorization of algorithms for solving typical problems, which limits the development of analytical thinking and creativity in students. This leads to a decrease in interest in mathematics and the formation of superficial knowledge, which ultimately affects the quality of education.

What about other school subjects? In the educational system, it is important to consider not only mathematics and Russian, but also disciplines such as natural sciences, foreign languages, and the humanities. Each of these subjects plays a role in the formation of a well-rounded individual. For example, studying biology helps us understand the fundamentals of life and ecology, while history develops critical thinking and an understanding of cultural heritage. Foreign languages ​​open doors to international communication and broaden horizons. It is important to remember that academic success depends not only on subjects but also on teaching methods and student engagement. Each school subject contributes to the overall educational picture, and their harmonious combination promotes the comprehensive development of schoolchildren.

Research on this topic is still limited. At the beginning of the introduction of the mandatory Unified State Exam, there were many concerns about the impact of the exam conditions on school teaching. Experts expressed the opinion that changing the assessment format could have a significant impact on teaching methods and student motivation.

In a 2011 article, researchers Georgy Malinetsky and Andrey Podlazov from the Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics of the Russian Academy of Sciences presented several hypothetical scenarios. Their work emphasizes the importance of mathematical models in analyzing various situations and predicting future events. Scientists have examined various aspects related to probability theory and mathematical modeling, which allows for a better understanding of complex systems and their behavior. These studies are significant for the development of applied mathematics and can be applied in various fields, such as economics, ecology, and engineering.

• The curriculum hours for literature are transferred to Russian, for which the Unified State Exam is mandatory, while literature is an elective;
• Laboratory workshops in chemistry and physics are discontinued because these skills are not tested on the Unified State Exam;
• Public speaking skills and oral comprehension are no longer developed in literature, history, or social studies;
• Working with reference books and searching for sources are not taught because reference books are not allowed on the Unified State Exam.

Opponents of the Unified State Exam claim that their concerns are justified. Several facts can be cited as confirmation. For example, the Unified State Exam in history emphasizes victories, which influences the content of the school curriculum. This leads to high school students, accustomed to following the Unified State Exam (USE) requirements when writing essays, losing originality in their essays at literature Olympiads.

Preparation for exams in literature, history, and social studies—popular subjects on the USE—is not mandatory for all graduates. The negative impact of the Unified State Exam (USE) on the educational process is manifested not so much in the quality of knowledge acquisition, but in the fact that many students simply ignore the study of these subjects. This leads to a decline in the overall level of education and understanding of the key concepts necessary for successful exam passing and further education.

A 2019 critical article, based on a survey of first-year students and their parents, highlights the negative impact of the Unified State Exam (USE) on school education. The introduction of the USE has reduced the educational potential of young people, as the high stakes of the exam force students to focus on only three or four core subjects. As a result, graduates often turn out to be poorly literate in other disciplines, which negatively affects their further education and professional training.