35% OUT OF 30 %
(NON-EQUIVALENCE IN RUSSIAN AND ENGLISH EDUCATIONAL CONCEPTS AND
TERMINOLOGY )
Foreword
The term “Russian” in this paper is used as a short cut adjective/noun to refer to that language
whose people share a common educational culture and educational terminology, having
belonged to the Soviet Union and, before that, forming part of the Russian Empire. Ukraine and
Russia have shared a root language for thousands of years as well as a common political,
economic and cultural history. Language is a highly sensitive, political area, and now Ukraine
and Russia are developing their own individual, educational profiles, but they still share
many common assumptions, concepts and core terminology.
Introduction – 35% out of 30%
While certain political barriers between East and West collapsed in 1991 co-operative educational
programmes can still encounter formidable obstacles in understanding. On a recent validation
trip to the Ukraine , while attempting to get to grips with the very different assessment
procedures, we1 came across the figure 35% in a column denoting an exercise marked out of
30%.
We asked the lecturer delivering this module if she could clarify this mark. She seemed
surprised - what was it we didn`t understand? “The exercise is marked out of 30%,” we
persisted, “how can a student then get 35%?”
“Oh, well that student did exceptionally well,”
she said, “so I gave him an extra 5%.”
While not suggesting that the practice of giving more that 100% is a general principle in marking
in Russian and Ukraine today, this experience illustrates some basic differences in approach
towards education in the former Soviet Union and the West , such as the autonomy of the
individual lecturer and the desire not be confined by rigid marking schemes; a wish to encourage
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
1
students, and the self-confidence to exceed normal marking limits. From the method and form of
assessment we can deduce a particular approach to and concept of education as a whole.
2
Context of Research
The context of our validation trip to the Ukraine was the mushrooming of educational partnerships
between former Soviet states and Great Britain Since 1991. With the opening up of the former
USSR and the possibility of more exchange of information and ideas these partnerships have
eagerly been sought by both sides for many reasons; the UK for increased prestige and
greater research possibilities, as well as money flowing in from consultancy fees and other
services. The East also seeks the prestige of joint home and Western diplomas; it needs the
know-how and technical aid the West can offer, and highly values placement opportunities for its
students. In the wake of scandals in Asia and China, however, UK universities are now being
very careful about checking the quality of courses that they validate abroad, adhering rigorously
to the guidelines of the UK Quality Assurance Agency. But there is often a great deal of difficulty
in adhering to guidelines when validating a foreign course where there is no measurable
structural/linguistic educational comparability. Giving 35% out of 30% is a difficult concept to
grasp in English. When the working practices are described in a foreign language and one is
working through an interpreter difficulties in understanding are magnified exponentially. A
further complication, however, is that not only is there non-equivalence at both the linguistic and
the practical level, but the non-equivalence is often not recognised for many long, frustrating
hours of discussions because of both the skill and the ignorance of the interpreter. S/he will
adeptly and consistently mistranslate precise terminology into and out of her/his native language
so fluently that both sides of the educational partnership are left puzzled and bemused : in spite
of, to all intents and purposes, an excellent interpreter, questions never seem to get answers and
answers never seem to be understood.
“Precision” as Sager says, “is a universal requirement
1
“We” were a British university panel validating an MBA course in the Ukraine in 1999/2000.
2This paper is based on my experience as a member of a validation panel for the MBA course in Ukraine, and the
definitive documents describing that MBA, as it is delivered in five centres in Ukraine: Kiev; Odesa; Lviv; Dnepropetrovsk
and Kharkiv; my research at Moscow State University and my discussions with leading Russian academics, in Moscow,
Ukraine and London
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
2
of communication…In special communication the finer differentiation which characterises the
internal knowledge structure of a discipline must be reflected as precisely as possible”
(109:1990). However, in multi-lingual discussions on educational systems precision is often
noticeably absent.
The interpreter may replace hyponyms in one language with superordinates
in translation and vice versa, fatally distorting the specific meaning of the terminology, so that
meaningless, but grammatically correct phrases appear in translation.
In the face of non-
equivalence, perceived or missed, the interpreter may substitute, without a pause, the nearest
word in meaning.
It is useful, therefore, in a period of growing internationalism, to explore and clarify the
differences between the UK and ex Soviet system of education, and the terminology used to
describe it.
Methodology of Research
In this paper I will look at examples of terms/words used in English and Russian educational
terminology where, for various reasons, there is difficulty in achieving equivalence. They fit,
broadly, into the following categories:

Terms that seem identical in both languages but when applied to education the specialist
meaning is lacking in English (test/sessiya).

Culture bound terms in the field of education that did not exist in Russian (learning outcomes)

Culture Bound terms that do not exist in English (vospitaniye/воспитание = education and
upbringing.)

Superordinates in English that have no equivalent superordinate in Russian (education)
Each example will be presented in a table where I look at the respective levels of equivalence of
two translations and where I explore to a greater or lesser extent the concept behind the term.
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
3
Russian words are transliterated and also given in Cyrillic. The first English translation may be
the one that was used by an interpreter in discussions on educational terminology in Ukraine or
Russia, before the difference in equivalence was uncovered. This is sometimes also the
dictionary definition. If there is no entry in the first translation column, it means this term/word did
not exist formerly and a new word/term has been coined to translate the Russian term/word.
The second translation is normally the nearest possible equivalent. If an English word is being
examined, I follow a slightly different procedure, looking at Russian collocations and synonyms,
in the case of the English word education . For the term learning outcomes, I follow the same
process as for the Russian words/terms.
For my use of word and term, I follow Sager`s definition:” In general reference, if a particular
attribute is to be emphasised the emphasis must be achieved by contextual contiguity, syntactic
devices, additional reference, etc, but in special language the emphasis is already present
through prior delineation of the subspace, which effectively excludes all attributes…which are not
assigned by the social norm of the discipline. ..” (20:90) In other words, if a word can be
qualified, it is a word, if not, it is a term.
I shall concentrate mainly though not exclusively on assessment terminology: this is an area that
reveals starkly the different aims and values of the respective education systems and holds the
key to understanding the different concepts behind the terminology. It is also an area where an
enormous amount of confusion can arise.
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
4
Non-Equivalent Terms And Words In Russian And English Educational
Terminology
EDUCATION
Let us start with the word education itself : in Russian there are, at least, three possible
translations for education,3 which complicate the translation of any English compound of this
word.
ENG.
1.RUS
2. RUS.
3. RUS.
TERM/WORD
Education
Образование/
obrazovaniye
Обyчение/
obucheniye
Воспитание/
vospitaniye
CATEGORY
COLLOCATIONS
word
Word/term?
Educational
system, State
education, level of
education, without
education
(SSSRY:83)4
The ensemble of
knowledge received
as a result of
education
(obucheniye)
Polysemic Word/term?
1.teaching
2.learning
3.education in school,
university ; paid
education/private
education
To impart knowledge
or skill to someone
Word/term?
Education of
somebody
partial
partial
DESCRIPTION/
SYNONYMS
EQUIVALENCE
Systematic influence
on the development
thinking, behaviour of
someone; Upbringing
/nurturing and
education in a
positive sense
partial
From this table we can see that obrazovaniye is the general abstract word for formal education.
Obucheniye describes the practical activity of education and vospitaniye fuses the idea of
education and upbringing. We might argue that these Russian equivalents are terms and
“education” in English is a word that needs qualifying to achieve the specificity of the Russian
terms.
But,on the other hand, although the Russian words for education are more specialised
3
There is also the word prosvescheniye (просвещение) – enlightenment. But there is normally no confusion with this
word as it is used in different contexts.
4
Slovar` Sochetaemosti slov russkogo Yazyka (Collocational dictionary) – M. “Russky Yazyk” 1983 – Словарь
сочетаемости слов русского языка – М «Русский язык» 1983
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
5
that the English one, they can still be further qualified, and thus do not fit Sager`s definition of a
term. Furthermore, obucheniye is a polysemic word with two distinct meanings:
It can mean “teaching” or “learning” (S.R.Y. M.1983). The Russian Dictionary OUP 2000 only
gives a rather ambiguous definition: teaching, instruction, training which does not make it clear
that this is the case. This dualism is also found in the verb uchit` (учить) which means both to
teach and to learn. This can make it very difficult to emphasise the importance of student centred
learning in discussions through an interpreter. There are other monosemous words for teaching
(преподaвание) and learning (изучение) but these are less widely used. This blurring of the
borders between the meanings teaching and learning reveals the lack of importance culturally of
the distinction between the different processes – they are seen to be fused into one general
action. This of course would be the ideal –a total unity , harmony between the teacher and the
learner so that is difficult to define where teaching ends and learning begins. On the other hand,
the lack of distinction between teacher and learner could equally be interpreted as making the
learner invisible – without, necessarily, an independent role. Given the fact that teaching in
Russia and the Ukraine is still predominantly teacher centred for economic and ideological/
political reasons, this might be the most obvious interpretation.
Vospitaniye (воспитание)
has no equivalent in English, although it has one in
German,
revealing the Prussian model the pre-Revolutionary Russian system of education was based on.
It encompasses the education and nurturing of the whole person, academically, spiritually and
morally. Sometimes vospitaniye is contrasted /linked with obrazovaniye and obucheniye as[ in
the 1920`s in the Soviet Union] : “Ученые занимались теоретико-методологическим
обоснованием воспитания и образования. Они выдвинули в качестве основопологающих
принципы историзма и связи школы с жинзнью, соединения обучения с производительным
трудом, единства обучения и воспитания, всестороннего и гармоничрого развития
личности. (Dzhurinskij 377:1999). This can be translated roughly as: ”Academics researching
into
the
theoretical
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
methodological
base
of
upbringing
(vospitaniye)
and
education
6
(obrazovaniye). proposed as basic tenets the principles of historicism; the links between school
and life; the combining of teaching/learning (obucheniye) with productive labour; the unity of
teaching/learning (obucheniye) with upbringing (vospitaniye) and the harmonious development of
the individual.”
The word vospitaniye predates the 1917 revolution, but
the idea of re-educating the whole
person was very much part of the revolutionary, Soviet ideology, and became a conceptual plank
of the Soviet educational process.5 It differentiated the Soviet system from that of the UK – where
a sharp line is drawn between home and school, formal education and family life. It became part
of the language of the Communist Party in slogans, such as “the communist (re)-education
(vospitaniye) of the workers”.
The collapse of the Soviet Union has left a hole in ideological life in academic as well as political
and personal life
“…What is called in Russia monoideology (the political ideology of Marxism-
Leninism which pervaded all teaching at all levels) has gone. It was an ideology that left little
space for personal choice and development, based as it was on totalitarian ideas, and allowing
little criticism of those in power. Still the abolition of this ideology has had its negative side….The
present ideological vacuum has brought into question the whole ethical basis of Russian life
today. Personal codes of conduct have been shaken , voided of cultural and spiritual values,
which are replaced by the omnipotence of money.” (Nikandrov 34:97)
If vospitaniye encapsulated the concept of whole-person education/upbringing/culturalisation than
an ekzamen, the next word I will look at, was deemed to be the best way to assess this
education.
In an interview with the author Dr. Nikandrov, President of the Russian Academy of Education, said: “This is an
extremely important word, which has no equivalent in English. I believe that the idea of educating the whole person
intrinsic in this word vospitaniye is vital to an understanding of the essence of Soviet education, and the way it differed
from education in the West. “ (Moscow, Russian Academy of Education, April 2001).
5
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
7
EKZAMEN
RUS
ENG. 1
ENG. 2
TERM/WORD
Ekzamen/экзамен
exam
Final exam
CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
EQUIVALENCE
word
Final oral exam
word
word
partial
yes
Traditionally most Russian final exams, in the humanities at least, are based on oral exams . The
students are given a list of questions at the beginning of the academic term/semester – for the
final, oral, exam they will be asked to talk at length on any three of them At the time of the exam
the student will pick three cards out of the many lying face down on a table. They are given a
little time to prepare and then invited to speak on them to a panel of usually three professors.
These sessions can be extremely gruelling, for the professors as well as the students, and could
last as long as an hour. Students have to cover a very wide theoretical base in order to be sure
that they can answer just three questions well: they must be able to talk on any aspect of it and
answer any additional question on this topic the examiners might care to throw at them.
Plagiarism can be detected and uncovered immediately, students can be grilled mercilessly if
examiners believe that they do not really know their subject. And they are, of course, assessed
not only on their answers.
Arguably, this again is an summative assessment of the whole
student, not just what they know, but the way they present it and the way they interact with their
examiners, the way they are dressed, the way they hold themselves.
Without question oral
exams contain a greater amount of subjective features than written ones, when students are
known only by a number. All the questions are different – not standardised, and there is no
second marking. This highlights once again the greater autonomy of the markers.
Thus, when the word ekzamen is used in Russian it immediately conveys to native Russian
speakers, without the necessity of any qualifier, the meaning of an oral, summative final exam.
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
8
We can to contrast this with some Russian words/terms for formative assessment.
The different terms for formative assessment reflect the relationship between student and
lecturer, which remains largely unchanged from Soviet times. In contrast to the West, there is
immense respect for the university lecturer, who still assesses the student not only on their output
(formative/summative assessment) but also on their behaviour in class, their participation in
class, their attitude towards work and the lecturer themselves.
The subjective assessment by
lecturers is possible because of the amount of class hours that each student completes, roughly
25 a week – which mean they know their students well. Some lecturers in the institution we
visited in Ukraine kept notes in the register, little ticks, to illustrate student performance in class,
others relied on their memory.
All this will feed into the final mark the student is given in a
transparent or veiled manner. We have already noted that the lecturer enjoys a great deal of
autonomy, both in setting assessment exercises and exams and in marking them and that there
is no systematic double/sample marking.6
One factor then, that defines the formative assessment, is the personal relationships between
student and lecturer, the subjective assessment, if you like by the lecturer, the other is the link
with school: students in the former soviet Union spend many more hours at university than do
British students.
Logically, as there is such a lot of class-time, the
university is more an
extension of school than in the west, there is less independent learning, less assessment geared
towards this, and more towards in-class assessment.
We also find that the difference between
teaching/learning methodology at university and at school is much less than in the UK.
Terms
like test, otchet, zachet, referat, all describes particular methods of assessment that are based on
school assessment exercises. They are immediately understood by Russian students, but when
translated leave the native English pedagogues very confused.
6
This is based on discussions with staff at the Academy of Public Administration, Kiiv, 2000
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
9
ZACHET
RUS.
ENG. 1
ENG. 2
TERM/WORD
зачет
test
exam
CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
term
Oral preliminary
(qualifying)assessment
exam
word
word
Partial, non-specific
Partial, non-specific
EQUIVALENCE
If we take the term zachet: this is a predominantly oral assessment and qualifier carried out by
the lecturer delivering the course which the student has to pass this in order to go on to take the
exam proper. But the mark given for the zachet does not contribute towards the final exam.
However, if they do very badly in the exam proper and they did well in the zachet the
teacher/lecturer could given them an additional oral to try and bump up their mark a bit.
These assessment terms are now becoming more fluid, under the influence of greater contact
with the West. Sometimes hybrid forms emerge, originating from Western educational language
but acquiring a separate meaning. Thus we have terms that are, supposedly calqued from UK
terms, but which we do not recognise. This can be because the wrong translation is applied, or
because of a misunderstanding of our system. The word test is one such example. I give below
a particular use of test as confirmed by staff at the Academy in Ukraine and Moscow State
University.
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
10
TEST – (ТЕСТ)
RUS
ENG. 1
Test/ тест - orig. from
Eng. And pre.1991 was
defined as standard
psychological testing
( M.1984 S.R.Y.ANCIRY.7)
hyponym
1. Test - this is also the
modern dictionary
translation (OUP
Russian dictionary
2000)
superordinate
A written assessment
exercise involving a set of
multiple choice questions,
originally only formative
now can make up part or
whole of a summative
exam.
Any exercise, written or
oral designed to test the
student`s knowledge,
normally informal
assessment (formative).
TERM/WORD
CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
EQUIVALENCE
Too general to be
meaningful
ENG. 2
.
Closed questions
LGP adjective+noun
together making up a
specific term.
Means not only
multiple choice
questions, but also
mean “yes” or “no”
answers, gap-fiil
exercises, etc.
Still not specific
enough
Traditionally, in Soviet education this kind of assessmentwas only used for informal,
formative,assessement. Now in joint partnerships, because double marking or sample marking is
required by the British side to conform to QAA guidelines this form of assessment is sometimes
used as a summative exam 8It is easier to check, if double-marking ever does get going, and
easier to standardise.
It was also possible in the institution we were looking at for there to be
two sets of tests 9one set for average students and one for those,who, it was thought, could do
better – rather like our two-tier GCSE`S.
Let us now look at an example of an English culture bound term relating to assessment, but this
time it does not denote the form of the assessment, but transparent descriptions of the results of
7
Slovar` russkogo yazyka v chetyrekh tomax – Akademiya Nauk SSSR, M. 1984
8
In the Ukraine we found that very often the final assessment of a module was largely or wholly
based on closed questions (DD 2000 – Kiev, Lviv, Kharkiv and Odesa)
9
Kiev Academy of Public Administration- Spring 2001
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
11
study, from the student`s point of view, what they will have learnt and be able to do at the end of
any particular period of study. These learning objectives are what the student will be assessed
on.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
ENG.
TERM/WORD
Learning Outcomes
CATEGORY
Culture bound term
in education
DESCRIPTION
What the student
can do at the end of
a course.
EQUIVALENCE
RUS 1
Did not exist
RUS 2
Rezul`taty
obucheniya/результаты
обучения
Calque/loan
translation/literal
translation
The results of
learning/teaching
Yes and no, depending
on interpretation of the
word obucheniye
The non-equivalence here is interesting, and represents a fundamental difference in the UK and
the Russian/Ukrainian attitude to education. We understand, of course, that with the
introduction of tuition fees, and the consistent devaluation of the grant, leading up to its abolition,
plus increasing unemployment , students in England and Wales have become more demanding
and discerning: they want to make sure not only that they receive a high quality university course
but that they obtain a good job at the end of it. Consequently they want more practical
elements in their courses and they want to know the relevance of what they learn at university for
work prospects afterwards.
And because of the mushrooming of universities and competition for
students, universities are obliged to take very seriously what students want, which also means
listening to what employers want from students. Hence clear and transparent learning outcomes.
In Russia/ Ukraine this shift has not happened. The emphasis is still overwhelmingly on
theoretical, academic study.
”It was assumed that after a five-year degree at Moscow State
University we could do anything at all connected with language – teach, interpret or translate,
without additional training, even thought the course was completely theoretical. And the amount
you were meant to read and learn off by heart was incredible. As English language students we
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
12
had to study renaissance literature, and I remember that I was asked the name of a dog
belonging to one of the characters in a play.
I only got a “3” 10 because although I knew the
name of the minor character, I couldn`t remember the name of his dog.”
“In retrospect I think the degree course in the Humanities was designed solely for students who
wanted to become academics. However, it was so general, and at the same time so detailed,
that after obtaining a degree you really could learn anything else – you had learnt how to study,
how to learn.11”
It might now be interesting to look at a couple of terms/words denoting periods in the academic
year/timetable and look at the different connotations of these terms/words. The word sessiya, is
another example of a word, like test, that sounds similar to an English word but has acquired a
different connotation, this time the different connotation was acquired in the pre-Revolutionary
period.
SESSION =-SESSIYA (СЕССИЯ) : LGP WORD AND LSP TERM IN BOTH LANGUAGES, BUT
RELATING TO DIFFERENT FIELDS AS A TERM.
TERM/WORD
CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
EQUIVALENCE
RUS.
Sessiya/сессия – from Latin
sessio (M 1988 gives two
meanings – 1 similar to our
«session» 2, exam period)
Polysemous word/term
LSP related to education
meaning the intense period
when all students have
formal exams.
ENG. 1
Session only given in
OUP Russian
ENG. 2
Exam period
Polysemous
word/term
LSP related to legal
terminology – when
the court is sitting
term
no
yes
Transparent
(calque)
10
Traditionally students in school and university in Eastern Europe and Russia were always
marked out of “5”. “5” was excellent; “4” was good; “3” was mediocre and “2” was a fail.
Interestingly enough “A “1” was only ever given to students not as a measure of their academic
ability but as a judgement on their personal behaviour. I only ever got it once in my scholastic
career, as a schoolboy when I had been very disruptive.” Dr. Nikandrov, in conversation with the
author , Russian Academy of Education, Moscow, april 2001
11 Elena OL`shevskaya in conversation with the author, June 2001.
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
13
It seems likely that a single word for the exam period, given this time more importance in Russian
than in English could be explained by two factors:
a) The importance education has traditionally held in the Soviet Union
b) The extremely centralised system of education in the Soviet Union, which meant there, even
more than here, all exams were held at exactly the same time.
As Mona Baker says: “Languages automatically develop very concise forms for referring to
complex concepts if the concepts become important enough to be talked about often.” (22:92)
As we have seen, the ex-Soviet educational system retains many organisational and linguistic
aspects of the Soviet period. As before the university remains largely an extension of school:
students are expected to attend seven hours a day, five days a week, do homework and
assignments.
In universities their lectures and seminars are quantified in
“pairs” which
themselves are composed of “hours (academic)”as were their lessons at school:
PARA/CHAS (ПАРА\ЧАС)
TERM/WORD
CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
EQUIVALENCE
RUS.
ENG. 1
ENG. 2
Para/пара:час/chas
(referential ellipsis. Short
for para chasov and
akademicheskii chas)
term
One academic hour
a pair/ hour
a double period /40
minutes X 2
LGP word
Sixty minutes
no
paraphrase
Formal equivalence
We have seen that there are close similarities between school and university in Russia/Ukraine.
It might seem contradictory, then, that there is a strong emphasis on acadmic/theoretical
acqusition as opposed to practical skills. Again this could be explained as an evolution in
pedagogical theory that has happened in the UK, but not yet in the former Soviet Union.
Although, one could also argue, that the young Soviet Union was one of the first exponents in
pedagogical theory of the necessity for unity of work and education (cf Vygotsky, Luria, et al.)
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
14
However, today the emphasis is firmly on academic theory in universities.
And this is why the
polysemic word navyki was difficult to translate : it is not traditionally used in an academic
context, and, thus, the interpretor intially opted for the wrong meaning:
NAVYKI (НАВЫКИ)
RUS.
ENG. 1
ENG. 2
TERM/WORD
Navyki (навыки)
habits
skills
CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
LGP word
S.R.Y. = an ability acquired
through practice, created by
habit. (often contrasted with
real ability)
LGP word
LGP Word
No
Yes
EQUIVALENCE
The above translation 1 caused absolute bewilderment among the English panel.
When the
translation 2 was elicited the deep contempt felt by some academic staff in Ukraine for practical
skills was expressed by a senior professor who remarked, witheringly,
12”These
are what
primary school children acquired, not something that university students should have to develop.”
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
15
One could also draw conclusions from the word for “academic “ in Russian.
NAUCHNY (НАУЧНЫЙ)
RUS.
ENG. 1
ENG. 2.
TERM/WORD
научный
Scientific (OUP R)
academic
CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
Polysemic word
Academic/scientific
LGP monosemic word
Monosemic word.
Theoretical, not
practical
Yes
EQUIVALENCE
no
The same word is generally used for scientific and academic in Russian – emphasising the
importance given to higher education and the dominance, perhaps of science of the humanities.
But also emphasising, in its emphasis on scientific, the value of theory over practice.
CONCLUSION
In this paper I have identified four significant, interconnected differences between the Soviet
system of education and that in the UK:

theory of pedagogy that wishes to assess the whole student, not just the outcome of what the
student does.

Comparative autonomy of lecturer/teacher in marking

value of theory over practice;

similarity to school, meaning more hours at the university and less independent learning (this
impacts upon the first two points).
The terms/words that I have chosen to examine clearly illustrate these differences. We could use
a table to summarise the implications of the difference in terminology:
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
16
TERMWORD
vospitaniye
ekzamen
zachet
test
Learning
Outcomes
DESCRIPTION
DIFFERENCE ILLUSTRATED
All-round
education/upbringing/
culturalisation
oral, final (summative) exam
conducted by three
professors/teachers – non
standard questions.

Whole student assessment

in-class assessment (oral) –
formative, but a necessary
qualifier for the final
(summative) ekzamen
Traditionally in-class written
assessment, now can also
be summative
What student will be able to
do after a period of study



Whole student ( gives a more comprehensive
picture of the student and his/her knowledge
than a written exam)
Relative autonomy of assessors/markers/
lecturers
Whole student assessment
Relative autonomy of teachers
Similar to assessment in school


Changing nature of educational practices in
Russia/Ukraine under influence of West



UK emphasis;
our practice of documenting in a transparent
way our courses
our practice of double marking – assessment
exercises should reflect the learning
outcomes – thus should be transparent not
only to students but to second markers.
Centralised educational system
Importance of education to people, increasing
importance and autonomy of
teacher/professor
Links with school

Sessiya
Exam period


Para/akade
mishekii
chas
Navyki
Length of sessions at
university

Structural similarity/links with school
Practical skills/habits

Nauchny
Lit. scientific but also mean
academic

Non-use of this term in education shows the
continuing belief in the importance of theory
over practice in higher education
Could illustrate the importance of theory over
practice, academic = scientific.
There are, then, many different reasons for mutual difficulty in understanding terminology
between East and West. Partly it is the years of separate development, an educational system
(Soviet) that developed along its own ideological pedagogical lines in a political system very
different from ours. An added complication, in analysing theory and practice in Russia and the
Ukraine today, is the rapid change , that is now taking place in the Russian language in many
specialised areas, such as administration, politics, the media and, to a lesser extent, education.
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
17
Meanings of terms and words shift and change, mutate and permute, under the unprecedented
pressure of the flood of language and culture from the West since 1991. Hybrid terms have
evolved – mongrels, that arise from a borrowing of a Western practice and naming it in Russian
and then translating this back into to English, so that in the final analysis, it makes no sense to
Russian or English people (for example credit interview - a term we found on documentation in
the Ukraine). So that there is now a mixture of western practice and terminology and traditional
Russian/Ukrainian practice and terminology in Russian and Ukrainian educational institutions.
However, it is interesting, looking at educational practice and terminology, to note that In many
cases, in spite of the recent isolation of the Soviet Union, it is the English term that is out of step
with terms in Europe and Russia and Ukraine. In Belgium until recently they had academic
hours and pairs, and sessions. In France and Belgium and Spain there is also no tradition of
double marking, and emphasis is still, above all on academic, theoretical subjects at university.
In many countries attendance at university is obligatory in the same way it was at school, for
several hours a day. It is also interesting to note the apparent contradiction between what was
seen as a totalitarian state (The Soviet Union) and the individual power/freedom of teachers and
lecturers. In England today lecturers are becoming more and more circumscribed in what they
can do, and the terminology reflects this (transparency, aims, objectives, learning outcomes,
double marking, etc…)
I said at the beginning of this article that in education today national barriers are breaking down
and international partnerships are being formed in ever greater numbers – but these will only
succeed if we understand each other and for this, to understand different terminology and
concepts, we must understand the cultural context. This understanding is also vital, in an era of
impending mass globalisation, if we are to value and defend national good practice in education.
This paper is, I hope, a contribution to that understanding.
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
18
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Mona Baker In Other Words – A Coursebook on Translation -, Routledge, London and New
York, 1992
Definitive Documents: Academy of Public Administration: Kiiv, Lviv, Dnenpropetrovsk, Odesa,
Kharkiv.
Dzhuгinskii A.N. Istoriya pedagogiki – Moscow 1999 (А.Н. Джуринский, История педагогики –
Москва 1999)
Nikandrov N.D. (1997) Educational Developments in Russia since 1991 .Staff and Educational
Development International 1(1), 29-37
Oxford Russian Dictionary 2000
Juan C. Sager, A Practical Course in Terminology Processing John Benjamin Publishing
Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia 1990
Slovar` russkogo yazyka v chetyrekh tomax (monolingual dictionary)– Akademiya Nauk SSSR,
M. 1984 (Словарь русского языка в четырёх томах), А.Н. , Москва 1984
Slovar` Sochetaemosti slov russkogo Yazyka (Collocational dictionary) – M. “Russky Yazyk”
1983 – (Словарь сочетаемости слов русского языка – М «Русский язык» 1983)
Slovar` Russkogo Yazyka (monolingual dictionary) Moscow 1983 (Словарь русского языка –
Москва 1983) (S.R.Y:83)
Tarragona 2001
Pieta Monks
19