We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Харківський класичний університет і Харківський інститут народної освіти: проблеми спадкоємності (історіографічні сюжети): до 100-річчя реформи університетської освіти в Україні.
- Authors
Богдашина, О. М.; Куделко, С. М.
- Abstract
The aim of the article is to highlight the evolution of ideas in Soviet and modern historiography on (non) perception of scientific traditions of Kharkiv Imperial University by the Institute of Public Education named after O. O. Potebnya. Research methods: problematic-historiographic, historicalchronological, comparative-historical; principles of systematicity and objectivity. Main results and scientific novelty: for the first time it has been considered in detail how researchers assessments have changed from denying the necessity of mastering the old principles of higher education to the perception of KhIPE as the heir of the pre-revolutionary university with partial preservation of traditions. The coverage in the historical thought of the 20s of the 20th-the beginning of the 19th century of problematic issues related to the establishment and operation of Kharkiv Institute of Public Education named after O.O. Potebny (hereinafter-KhIPE) is analyzed. Particular attention is paid to the diversity of opinions and assessments of KhIPE perceptions of the traditions of Kharkiv Imperial University (hereinafter-Kharkiv University). The authors concludes that the traditions of Kharkiv University were partially preserved in the work of KhIPE, thanks to the inherited material base, and most importantly, the preserve of the main teaching staff, employees and part of the prerevolutionary students. In the latter case, the years 1921-1924 are meant, when some of students who had studied before the university closed in 1919 returned to study and noIn the latter case, the years 1921-1924 are meant, when some of students who had studied before the university closed in 1919 returned to study and non-proletarian youth made up a significant proportion of the student contingent. In historical science KhIPE’s estimation as successor to Kharkiv University is unstable. Soviet authors focused mainly on the refusal of the leadership of the People’s Commissar of Education of the USRR and IPE on the forms of the liquidated imperial university. Meanwhile, the contemporary authors, on the one hand, emphasize the voluntarism and failure of the educational reform and the 1933 forced restoration of universities by the Soviet power. On the other hand, the idea that the tradition of the Imperial University was more than accepted until recently was considered to be in keeping with KhIPE traditions. The article is dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the most radical reform in the history of domestic universities, the consequences and historical significance of which cause lively discussions among experts. The practical significance of the article is to change the priorities in teaching and promoting the history of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. The originality of the study is due to the unbiased consideration of a wide range of used historiographical sources (scientific works and journalism). Type of article: theoretical, research.
- Publication
Universe of History & Archeology / Unìversum Ìstorìï ta Arheologìï, 2020, Vol 3, Issue 1, p16
- ISSN
2664-9950
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.15421/26200102