Консенсус

Постійне посилання зібрання

https://repository.sspu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/13235

Переглянути

Перегляд Консенсус за Ключові слова "19 століття"

Зараз показуємо 1 - 1 з 1
  • Документ
    Primary Parish Education in Kherson Gubernia After the K. Pobedonostsev’s Reform (1884-1900)
    (2025) Tryhub Oleksandr; Тригуб Олександр
    The purpose of the paper is to determine the place and role of parish education, which was formed as a result of K. Pobedonostsev’s reforms, highlighting its strengths and weaknesses (the level of youth education, teacher training issues, material condition of schools, etc.), using a regional approach – the territory of the Kherson gubernia/eparchy. Conclusions. The reforms of the Ober-Prosecutor of the Holy Synod, Konstantin Pobedonostsev, had a significant impact on the development of parish education both throughout the Russian Empire and specifically in Ukrainian gubernias. The essence of his reforms was directed towards strengthening the Church’s role in teaching and upbringing, which, as evidenced by existing materials, had both positive and negative consequences. As a result, there was a rapid expansion of the network of parish schools, with complete subordination to the Holy Synod. By the end of 1884, there were 96 parish schools and literacy schools in the Kherson gubernia/eparchy, and by 1900, their number reached 657, with over 32,000 students. The main components of the educational process were the Law of God, reading church texts, writing, and arithmetic, with a focus on religious education. At the same time, as indicated by reports from the Kherson eparchy, agricultural, craft, and handicraft subjects began to be taught in the parish schools. On the other hand, parish education had to compete with zemstvo schools, which led to the scattering of financial resources, as the Kherson eparchy was one of those where the zemstvos financially supported this type of elementary school. However, the state funded parish schools more actively than the zemstvo schools. Unfortunately, despite the increase in the number of schools, the quality of education remained low due to the narrow curriculum. Illiteracy remained widespread, with more than 80% of peasants illiterate by 1897, as many children either did not attend school or left early. Furthermore, many peasant families preferred children’s labor at home or in the fields to providing education. Thus, Pobedonostsev’s reforms made parish schools the main tool for elementary education for peasants. They helped spread basic literacy, but at the same time limited secular education and contributed to the preservation of a traditional, religiously conservative approach to education.