Part 1

One of the main things to understand with respect to Education policy in the USSR (just like other policies in economic and cultural fields) is that it must be viewed in the framework of building Socialism since Education was viewed as one component in achieving that grand goal. It would be necessary to understand a lot of historical background to understand the context in which policies were made during the different time period (s).

Once it had become clear that the revolutionary trends in advanced Industrialised countries of Europe had abated and the USSR was, for the moment, isolated, it dawned on the leadership that they had to move forward on their own using with respect to economic reconstruction. The economy was in dire straits with a catastrophic 70 fall in output, 97 percent in exports, 83 percent fall in imports, breakdowns in transportation (railways) and the migration by workers from the urban centers into rural areas. Indeed, the numerical strength of the proletariat declined from 3.6 million to 1.5 million. Under this circumstances, the regime made concessions to the peasants and to a lesser extent to the urban petite bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie specialists in the form of New Economic Policy (NEP) that restored market economy first in Agriculture and then in Light and too far lesser extent in Heavy Industry. State Enterprises organized as Trusts or Joint Stock Companies were given considerable autonomy and appeared in form of Free Trading Enterprises on the market that bought and sold goods on the basis of commercial accounting, payments were charged for State services and the unemployed workers were to rely on unemployment insurance for survival. Indeed, a person returning to Moscow in 1924 for the first time in 10 years would find a lot of similarities with his life in 1914 before the War. Indeed, this weakened the hand of Communist 'cadres' who were generally appointed based upon their revolutionary credentials and the service of the Red Army during the Civil War. The Bolsheviks were dramatically short as far as administrative or technical talent was concerned and this only increased the importance of bourgeoisie specialists in both the State and the Enterprise. Indeed, even the newly formed Gosplan was dominated by them and this influenced several decisions ranging from currency reform to implementation of balanced budgets through cuts in Welfare and other public services. As Bukharin put it succinctly, "We had to make considerable economic concessions in order to avoid making political concessions".

The relative economic liberalization was complemented by increased political, social and cultural repression against the former ruling class. This might appear contradictory but it made perfect sense from a Bolshevik perspective. Lenin feared that the Capitalist enemies and their lackeys would use this opportunity to overthrow the Proletarian State. Thus, there was a trial of Mensheviks and Left Socialist-Revolutionaries who were tolerated previously. The economic concessions were leading to increasing discontent with the revolutionaries in the Party and especially the Soviet Youth organizations who were the most radical group in the Society. Many Western commentators had wrongly blamed the 'Old Bolshevik' intellectuals for some of the most extreme policies of the Government. In reality, most were much more moderate, 'bourgeoisie' and willing to make concessions with traditions. Lenin and Trotsky were the exceptions to this rule. The influx of the Industrial Workers and young students made the Party increasingly radical. This group was at the forefront of promoting 'free love', fight against "reactionaries", the Church and established authority in general. Indeed, during the heady days of 1920's, the slogan of "Down with Capitalist Parental authority" became popular with them. Komsomol members were charged with spying on their parents especially those who were nostalgic of the past. They were genuine believers in changing society, by force if necessary and making a decisive break with the past. Thus lectures became a rarity, education went 'outdoor' and social activities and practical work was considered to be superior to classroom learning which was identified with the past and Tsarist regime. Teachers lost their authority and Exams were abolished.Teachers were viewed as a part of bourgeoisie Intelligentsia who were the enemies of the Proletariat and the Peasants.

Things came to ahead in 1927 when there were widespread rumors in the country over a potential foreign invasion. To make matters worse, there was the Grain procurement crisis in 1928 when the State collection of grain was far less than the leaders expected due to a combination of price controls and fears of foreign invasion as the peasants decided to withheld grain. This was blamed by the left on the toleration of bourgeoisie elements by the Party and the support given by the Right Opposition. The regime became paranoid that the foreign anti-Communists would tie up with the Industrial experts and the kulak. In 1928, there was the purge of engineers and other specialists on charges that they were members of an alleged 'Industrial Party' that were preparing for a coup with the aid of foreign Governments, mainly Britain. Indeed, here is what Stalin wrote in a letter to Menzhinskii who was the head of OGPU,

It turns out they had intended the intervention for 1930, but then postponed it to 1931, or even 1932. That's quite probable and important. It is even more important because this information came from a primary source, i.e. from the group of Riabushinskii, Gukasov, Denisov, and Nobel' [capitalists with major prerevolutionary Russian interests], which represents the most powerful socio-economic group of all existing groups in the USSR and in emigration, the most powerful in terms of capital and in terms of its connections with the French and English governments.

Though the trial of the Experts was completely fraudulent and based upon fabricated evidence, historians now generally agree that the many people especially Stalin believed in them as the above-mentioned correspondence showed. This also made the leadership aware of how deficient the Soviet system was in producing the kind of skilled labor (Both white collar and blue collar worker) that would be required for establishing a modern Industrial Society. This would mean that workers needed to learn to set up, handle and operate large machinery. The total State budget as a percentage of total output was 18 percent which was only 2 percent larger than in Tsarist times. Indeed, as Trotsky would note in the Platform of the United Opposition, the budget of the Proletarian State should constitute a larger than the budget of the bourgeois State.The reliance on the bourgeoisie specialists had proven to be a very risky path that could imperil the State and who were strongly disliked by the working class base of the Party because of their perceived privileges and perks and 'autocratic' habits.

Indeed, the massive expansion of Education system occurred during the course of the First Five Year Plan and thereafter. Like much of what is considered to be "Soviet Style Institution", it got the form it did during the 1930's. It is impossible to separate Education policy (it's organizational structure, content etc) without understanding the broader economic policy of the Stalin regime which I will do in the next part.