Team; what's going on in this thread? It's like a bomb filled with crap went off in here. Please, no more half-assed answers. The rules - here they are. Here is the meta post on "What it means to post a good answer in /r/AskHistorians": but let's break it down a little. If you're choosing to answer a question in /r/AskHistorians, there are three questions you should ask yourself first in turn:

1. Do I, personally, actually know a lot about the subject at hand?

2. Am I essentially certain that what I know about it is true?

3. Am I prepared to go into real detail about this?

But seriously; we all know this. And it's a great question - we just need to be patient for the answer.

The answer is actually a lot more straight-forward than you would think.

During the Russian civil war when the Bolsheviks took power, literacy rates fell drastically. Lenin, being a smart man, recognized this as a problem. Lenin was also a major fan of paper socialist literature and was under the impression that the best way to spread his ideals was to ensure that everyone could read his propoganda. Therefore a policy was issued during the Russian civil war (around 1919 if I remember correctly) called Likbez.

Basically this policy instituted mandatory education for all children and required all persons up to the age of 50 to become literate. In order for this to become a reality a part of the socialist army was sent around the nation with teachers specifically to make the nation more literate. They established "schools" in various population hubs and worked closely with current unions and factories. The schools, in reality, were not much more than one or two teachers education classes in the basics of reading and writing. The schools only taught fairly basic things, but they did establish a good foundation on which the communities they were in could improve education.

I'm sorry that the writing is a bit poor, but typing this out on my phone is kind of a nightmare.

The best source I could find short of my textbooks - http://business.highbeam.com/437181/article-1G1-18173705/literacy-and-labour-russian-literacy-campaign-within

TL;DR - Lenin forced it to happen in order to spread communist ideals.

Edit: Also check out the /u/facepoundr below for better specifics and more depth. http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1v8hz2/how_exactly_did_russia_educate_their_whole/ceq3yso

Your question is a good one that requires far more space and knowledge than I possess, but I can try to help you understand a bit. I apologize if this fails to meet the "comprehensive" criterion for answers.

Russia's first notable modernization for our purposes was in the 1860s and 70s by Alexander the II. Famous for emancipating the serfs in the early 1860s, he also reformed the military, city planning, and education during his reign. Unfortunately for him, he was assassinated in 1881 (ironically, by left-wingers who wanted even more reforms that we would recognize as traditional liberal reforms, like universal suffrage and a constitution.) Things quickly regressed and reforms were repealed.

The civil war and violence that started in the early 1900s began to crush many parts of Russian society, and the education system was not spared. Institutions and individuals were severely disrupted by widespread violence between the Reds and Whites. However once the Bolshevik's won in 1917, they began to institute their policies with vigor and, at least at first, they placed an emphasis on education.

Even before illiteracy became a crime in Russia on December 26, 1919, the Bolsheviks were following Lenin's ideological imperative to educate the population - especially the proletariat. In 1918, a central authority established the year before took over control of all schools in Russia. In addition to the establishment of new schools and compulsory attendance, Lenin's policies also led to the creation of part-time schools for adults so they could learn how to read and write.

(Note: the motivations for this are subject to dispute. I think many scholars would say that literacy was crucial to spread communist propaganda, while others would argue Lenin was earnest in his desire to involve the proletariat in the governance of the country. Additionally, the Bolshevik's knew that education was crucial to industrialization, and they badly wanted to become a world superpower.)

In addition to being centralized and mandatory, education became well-funded and fully subsidized during this time. The planned nature of the Russian economy meant the individual desires of a pupil became subsumed by the needs of the state - schools often featured vocational training, and their primary purpose was to industrialize the nation. They were heavily formalized and featured straightforward, pro-communist political teachings, but also valued the rationality of the sciences and the usefulness of skilled trades.

All of this is fairly accepted and observable, and there's also a more intangible factor that I would say is generally accepted. Socialist ideology includes a great emphasis on education for the purposes of preparation for labor. While we may think working hard is important in a capitalist society, it can be argued it is even more important in a socialist one. Work was a political participation in a socialist system of equality, and was the highest and most important political action a socialist could take. Much of the work required in Russia during this time required a fairly amount of schooling, and thus schooling, and advancing far in the type of schooling which would benefit the state's industrial apparatus, was considered very desirable. There were even social organizations set up to teach parents how to motivate their children in school, where they could talk about how to help their children perform.

So now that we've got the baseline education in the 1920s and early 30s, you bring up the purging. While its true that Stalin did purge many educated elites, especially in the sciences, I believe that the engineering fields were largely spared his wrath. Practical application of sciences, especially those with military or industrial foci, were encouraged even more under Stalin than they had been previously.

You mention that PhDs take 6-8 years - well, kind of. I'm not sure about this, but I doubt many of the leaders of engineering in Russia were actively involved in dissertations or doing creative research, with the purpose of expanding knowledge within a field. From what I've read, the educational system was much more focused on the practical aspects of the field - how to build X and, if you were very smart, how to build X faster, better, and/or cheaper.

This is a very controversial question apparently, and hopefully I can answer it adequately.

First you have to look at the education system of Russia in the 1800's. Many reforms had been made that allowed for the development of the intellectual elite. Universities had been built, and the some of the nobility began attending these universities, along with the petit-bourgeoisie. While the vast majority of Russians did not attend the universities, the elite did, and allowed for a cultural golden age, as evidenced by the works of Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, and and a multitude of Russian composers. The science department was not lacking in this period either, with physical, or hard sciences, dominating the field of Russian science. Their achievements include non-Euclidean geometry, the periodic table, and Pavlov.

Russian education was not lacking in quality by the 1900's. It was comparable or greater (depending on your opinion) than western European education. What is was lacking in was quantity. Before Nicholas 2 could fully implement his reforms, the Bolsheviks made their move. In 1914, 91% of children were in school.

To quote Lenin, “As long as there is such a thing in the country as illiteracy it is hard to talk about political education." After the Russian Revolution, massive education reforms were implemented. If you wanted to have enlightened workers, they needed to be educated. The infrastructure was already there, it just needed to be implemented. There were already plenty of intellectuals to see it through.

Now I want to address some of your other questions. You say that in the early 1900's, Russia suffered from backwardness. In some ways, this is very true. Russian industrialization was far behind Europe. Their economy was based on agriculture, and not industry. This is the backwardness you refer to. It does not, in any way, apply to intellectual backwardness. The backwardness of Russia in 1900 does not apply to its educational system.

You are wondering where the hard science came from in the Soviet Union. The answer is that they mostly kept the scientific community from the tsarist era. You do point out that during the Great Purge that many intellectuals were eliminated. This is true. To understand that, you have to realize that in Russian history, science is interwoven with politics. The Tsars feared that scientists coming back from Europe would also be influenced by Enlightenment era ideals. This did not change in the Soviet era. And while the intellectuals were purged, many still remained.

The next thing you ask is how a PhD equivalent could be earned in less than 8-10 years. You have to understand the Soviet focus on specialization. This is was not a capitalist country, where if you generalized your education in social sciences and the arts you may find yourself in better employment. If you were to become a scientist, that was what you focused on. It seems plausible to reach a PhD equivalent in 5-6 years in these conditions.

The last thing I want to comment on is Russification. One of the problems with educating all of Russia at the beginning of the Soviet era is that there are dozens of languages within the Soviet Union. While Lenin encouraged this, beginning in the late 30's Stalin did not. Russian was a required language of study, along with math, science, and social studies. Since many higher institutions were taught in Russian, this allowed for these institutions to draw from a much bigger pool of applicants from before. In addition, since everyone knew Russian, it allowed everything to be standardized as well.

The country's expansion in education is not surprising considering Soviet policies and the prior tsarist educational policies as well.

There is a lot of disinformation here that needs to be cleared up. I think the original post had some disinformation originally that may have spawned answers that are incorrect or biased.

The major thing to understand is that the Russian Empire had a network of universities that existed far before the Russian Revolution and subsequent start of the Soviet Union. Peter the Great established a great number of universities during his rule back in the 18th century, which along with Catherine the Great they had a system of education based upon the European model of education. Peter established a military school along with universities in his new capital of St. Petersburg. Moscow State University, a university with a great reputation even today was established back in 1755. Russia had a system of education long established before the First World War and the subsequent Revolution.

The intelligentsia that began in the 19th century and ultimately evolved to the revolution were by and large educated at these universities. For example V. Lenin's brother was a biologist that researched earth worms, and from what I have heard is that his research is still used today. Rasknolikov, a fictional character from Dostoevsky's book Crime and Punishment was a graduate student at an university in St. Petersburg. The point is the idea that Russia before the revolution was a bunch of serfs banging rocks together is a misnomer and one that should be expelled before speaking about education during the Soviet Union.

The problem with Russian education was something that plagued the Russian Empire. The problem was ultimately the inequality that was inherent in the economic model that was established. Russia had these great military academies and universities, however the peasant population of Russia did not have access to them, and as result were in your terms "backwards." There existed little social mobility for those born on the bottom rungs of Russian society. Therefore only the elite were able to even use the system of education that was established long before. This meant by and large the majority of the population was uneducated even at the basic levels. The Russian Empire did try to alleviate this, for if you wanted more educated people you had to train them in even basic literacy. They established zemstvo which sought to teach literacy to the peasants, however it existed as a voluntary program for the nobility to set up for peasants.

Therefore in summation, the Russian Empire had a great body of the uneducated, however at the top of society was a highly educated elite that used bodies of education that had long been established before the Revolution.

With the Soviet Union forming they did away with the economic stratification between those that had and those who had not. Education at the university level was free to those who had merit, instead of before where it was based on monetary admission. They also went on a huge campaign to educate the peasants and the working class of Russia with great speed. They established "reading houses" where they sought to train women in basic literacy, seen as a way to have the mothers be able to teach their children. The educated were encouraged to educate those who were not, essentially. The effort was great for the lower rungs of society who did not have access to the basic literacy unless a large land owner previously was altruistic.

The highly specialized fields were often very sought after. In regards to agriculture (my specialization), the highly specialized were trained by outside experts. The Soviet Union would pay very handsomely to those outside the Soviet Union to train and educate their "middle managers." For example they hired some large scale farmers from the United States to build super farms in the Soviet Union. The farmers would be paid in hard currency, and also they would be able to test theories on super large farms.

The same was also true for industrialization. At Magnitogorsk, the largest steel mill in Russia, the Soviet Union brought in experts from the United States to help build it. It would eventually become the largest steel mill in the world.

The hiring of outside experts would continue throughout the Soviet Union. When Nikita Khrushchev wanted to start growing a large amount of corn in Russia he was contacted by Roswell Garst, a huge name in hybrid corn seed at the time. Also as others had said that after the fall of Nazi Germany the Soviet Union recruited heavily the scientists from the rocket program, as well as the German nuclear researchers as well. They also received Germany's educated that remained in East Germany after the war, that then could be hired by the Soviet Union without going outside of the Eastern Bloc.

To be noted, some of those that were educated were not the highest caliber. However, those at the top of the pyramid in the Soviet Union were highly educated and could rival any western counterparts. For example Sergei Korolev who is seen as the father of astronautics, was highly educated and was the lead designer of the Soviet Space program. The rockets he designed are still being flown today.

In complete summation: The Russian Empire had established higher education long before the Soviet Union, however only the elite could use it. The Soviet Union opened the doors to higher education and sought to teach everyone within the Soviet Union in basic literacy so they could have specialists. To industrialize and to move the nation forward they hired outside experts from the world to the Soviet Union to help teach. Later on they would acquire German scientists who led the way to the Nuclear and Space programs.

Selected bibliography:

Magnetic Mountain: Stalinism as a Civilization Stephen Kotkin

A People's Tragedy Orlando Figes

An Economic History of the USSR Alec Nove.

Russia: A History Gregory Freese

Smolensk Under Soviet Rule Merle Fainsod

Every Farm a Factory: The Industrial Ideal in American Agriculture Deborah Fitzgerald

Followup questions:

Did a lot of Russians attend Western European universities?

Did educated socialists outside Russia immigrate and assimilate?

Did some Imperial nobles compromise with the Bolsheviks to survive?

Since the answers so far are so spotty, I'll pass on what I've learned from Sheila Fitzpatrick's excellent and critical "Everyday Stalinism" until an expert can pick up the slack.

The changes were just as dramatic as you think. As late as 1926 only 57% of Soviet citizens 9-49 were literate--thirteen years later that figure jumped to 81% (pp.70) This is course ignoring the enormous growth in technical training and higher education. Free and universal education cannot on its own explain such massive successes, and neither can the accelerated rate of urbanization and industrialization prompted by the five year plans and collectivization.

The real answer is that the Soviet state engaged in a massive effort to produce a a culture of learning. And they were largely successful--"every visitor to the Soviet Union in the 1930s commented on the passionate love of reading and zest for learning of the Soviet population." (87) Propaganda proclaimed constantly that all the evils of everyday life could be vanquished through knowledge and hard work, factory workers were encouraged to attend part-time technical schools after work (and those who did so could count on a higher-paying position), workers on collective farms competed to master new technologies such as tractors and chemical fertilizers, and party members were expected to have, in addition to a knowledge of Marxism, practical know-how and "culture." We often forget that the thirties were a time of massive upward mobility in the Soviet Union (although Khrushchev's peasant background is trumpeted near and far) and "party membership and education, preferably combined, were the main routes to advancement in Soviet Russia." (16) Someone who pursued an education could count on work, since due to the rapid rate of industrialization there were shortages of qualified workers, and an improved material condition, but also a much higher social status. Students of proletarian or peasant origin were given priority in university admission, fostering a sense of rapid progress in the lower class. Education also had a moral character, and superstition was seen as a dangerous vice that threatened the continued existence of the Soviet State--for Communists who came of age in the '20s and '30s "education was extremely important: to acquire an education was not just a path to personal success but also an obligation that one owed the party."(18)

In terms of scientists and intellectuals, they did face closer political scrutiny, but also received a privileged access to goods and services, a large amount of funding, and official honors.

So i hope this has answered your question. A combination of material and moral incentives drove workers and peasants to better themselves and to work hard in their new positions. There was also less of a divide between labor and students. Workers pursued education in their extremely limited free-time, and educated people were incentivized to tutor them in theirs.

1. How were the first illiteracy rates measured and how were they measured during 1940? What were the sampling pools? Were they biased towards cities or rural areas, ethnicity, religion, age, social status? Maybe they were rigged some other way

2. How did Russia increase classroom attendance? How did Russia provide Classrooms at all for areas without them? What motivation did a teacher have to teach in far out places that have terrible weather?

3. Were there any unintended consequences to improved literacy? What were the governments alternative motives for it (after all this is Stalinist Russia we're talking about, I'm sure he connived something into the education system

My first post was downvoted to oblivion, here's another try:

First, Russia before the Revolution was already on its way to industrialization and had quite an educated upper class. During 1914-1915 academic year, there were 127,000 students in 105 universities. [1] In 1914, there were 11600 academic professionals in Russia. [3] The great Purge didn't start to happen until 30s. There were still two decades after the revolution for the knowledge to get passed on.

After the Revolution, higher education became accessible for everyone for free. Lenin signs an order where anybody can be admitted to a university, regardless of prior education credentials. Since many were not qualified to be admitted to university-level programs, universities had remedial education programs, also free. "Working Faculties" were created, where adult workers and peasants could study to prepare for admission to the universities, after work. [2]

All higher education was very closely related to the needs of the planned economy and the industry. Many students were adult former peasants/workers who were studying part time at night after working in factories. As such "technical higher education institutions" (VTUZs) were created en masse, where technical/vocational education was prevalent, as required by factories, mines, farm work, etc. [2] So, Soviets didn't too much care about "humanities" side of higher education, they needed technical workers, engineers and technical specialists. New schools were built for this demand.

There were still not enough engineers and technical specialists graduating, so VTUZs were expanded and many became specialized, focusing on particular areas of industry (e.g. energy, farming, metal mining, chemistry for farming, etc). Curriculum in specialized VTUZs was shortened to 3 years. [2]

So basically, the planned economy dictated the need for human resources that had to be educated to work in the industry. The brightest went on to study to become engineers, the rest went on to work in the factories and mines.

Sources, all in Russian:

1. http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/bse/129062/%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0

2. http://www.mathnet.ru/links/e56969b099392119569f00b7d58df8e7/rm5138.pdf

3. http://slovari.yandex.ru/~%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B8/%D0%91%D0%A1%D0%AD/%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0.%20%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%83%D0%BA%D0%B0/

Had to consult the bookshelf. I believe this passage is in order.

From top to bottom, the educational system was employed in the service of the state. It was not merely that the school provided a means of political indoctrination. Its main purpose was to prepare technically trained personnel for specific jobs, without wasting time and money on "general education." As early as 1933 it was prescribed that every graduate of a university or of a ploytechnicum must, as the price of his training, accept the job to which he was assigned, no matter where; evasion was made a criminal offense. In 1938 this practice was tightened up, and its administration entrusted to the appropriate People's Commissariat, which was to keep a careful register of all its specialists with the advantage of higher education and to be continuously responsible for the proper utilization. During the period of the Second FYP the average number of university graduates was 74,000 a year (as against 34,000 in the period of the First FYP); the polytechnicums turned out an additional 125,000 a year (as against 58,000). The number of "engineers" graduated was raised from 7,900 in 1933 to 31,300 in 1938; the number of doctors, veterinarians, and pharmacists from 9,400 to 24,000; of teachers from 10,500 to 35,700; while that of other nonmilitary specialists increased only from 6,800 to 15,500.

From A History Of Russia by Jesse Clarkson

It goes on to say that the Stalin Constitution of 1936 guaranteed free education to all, but amended it four years later to charge tuition for students grade 7 and above.

First of all, Russia was not entirely uneducated. 17th and 18th century Russia produced some of the greatest music, literature, philosophy, etc. in the western canon (e.g. Tchaikovsky, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky).

Russia also has several old universities: Saint Petersburg State University, founded 1724, Moscow State founded 1755. There are a few others that are of the same age (this info is easy to find through a google search).

So my point is, even though literacy was low, there still was a university system in place and they had an academic tradition.

Second of all, I would dispute your literacy numbers. Source? I can't find anything that says the there was only 20% literacy in 1900, and I don't believe it. With a quick google search I'm finding pages saying that mass education was considered important in 19th century Russia. Russia was not the most backwards country in 1900; yes, they were mostly an agricultural society, and I what I find more interesting is how they went from an agricultural society to a highly industrial society within a generation (although that's a different topic).

Thirdly, I think you're on the wrong track by thinking in terms of modern institutional titles and processes: you don't need a system of 10 year "PHD candidates" and masters and "PHD's who would otherwise be working in industry" (what industry?) to be educated. You just need to hit the books.

It was communism, although it is a scourge, the Russian flavor of it puts education as a high priority