“We Simply Must Fake It”

In early September 2025, a group of Russian experts published a study examining the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on Russian schools. According to the report, the war quickly affected the educational system. In addition to introducing essentially ideological “lessons” and new patriotic rituals, the government centralized school management, limited school autonomy, and pressured opponents by dismissing teachers and even initiating criminal cases against them. However, learning about these changes from the media is quite different from experiencing this new reality firsthand. 

The Teacher’s Tale

— ​​How did you get into this profession? Why did you choose to work in a school?

— I started working in school education pretty late, about three years ago. Maybe it’s just that, as you get to a certain age, you feel the need to share your experience with others. You feel like you have something to offer children.

— How has your work changed since the war began?

— I had to develop an attitude toward sensitive topics and decide how to talk about them in order to set boundaries. Fortunately, it wasn’t very difficult in my case because the teachers and children at our school have a fairly trusting relationship. 

Moreover, I never intended to guide my students toward any particular conclusions. In general, I don’t believe that’s the right approach. For example, if bullying occurs in class, it must be stopped — that's part of a teacher's job. However, when it comes to evaluating the situation in the country or asking questions about it, things are more complicated. Some cases might be clear-cut, but others are not so straightforward. As a teacher in a position of authority, I have always tried to avoid imposing my personal views on my students, even on issues important to me.

— Overall, what is your personal stance on the war in Ukraine?

— This is an entirely unforgivable act of invasion and aggression that resulted in countless deaths.

— Over the past 20 years, there has been a gradual increase in militarization and pro-state political polarization in schools. Examples range from the local, such as Putin’s address appearing in a first-grade primer, to the large-scale, such as “Yunarmiya,” “Conversations about Important Things,” and so on. Many such developments have emerged since the start of the war. How has this affected your work?

— It depends greatly on the school and the region. Teachers often change schools based on their political views, worldview, desire to participate in certain activities, and willingness or unwillingness to accept the relationships that have developed at the school. The impression of widespread militarization may not always be accurate. Even before the war, cadet programs were ideal for children who needed more discipline. Some parents wanted to send their teenagers there. They knew that, in some ways, they were falling short as parents and that the school could not help. Having an additional educator look after the children helped teenagers get through the difficult years of adolescence, when preparing for school is hard and there are few disciplinary institutions. Depending on the school and region, cadet programs sometimes provided free uniforms and meals. For some families, this was an important benefit, because they did not have to purchase school uniforms. I did not notice any harmful effects on the children, nor did I see them marching off to military school en masse. 

Of course, what is happening now with Yunarmiya or the Movement of the First is ideological pressure. However, schools often adapt this new form of administrative regime to suit their own needs.

Some parents just want their children to be somewhere, and they don’t particularly care about educational outcomes. Only a few parents still want schools to focus on teaching.

As a result, many parents don’t care about these additional activities. Children don’t take them seriously either because they see the attitudes of adults. Therefore, whenever I read about the great excitement surrounding this topic, I realize it has nothing to do with reality.

For example, I am glad that the “Conversations About Important Things” lessons cover topics like animals and the elderly. Perhaps they will touch someone’s heart or help a teacher connect with their students. Children respond when a teacher speaks sincerely; they can sense it. Regarding the topic of the “special military operation,”  mainly slogans are heard anyway, as even Putin’s supporters are often unsure whether it was worth sending so many young men to this war. Some children respond well to positive, understandable initiatives, such as animal welfare and nature conservation. The name doesn’t matter, whether it’s “Conversations About Important Things” or something else. 

— So, based on your experience, are things not as bad as the media says they are?

— It depends on what we are talking about. Typically, school is depicted as a place of total ideological control and pressure. For example, there has always been an element of state policy present, such as the anthem and the flag. However, schools have other concerns, and the anthem won’t help us deal with bullies or improve our poor semester results. So, although the authorities make us do all these things, the events we hold are often just for show.

— What about the “Conversations about Important Things” lessons? As far as I know, teachers can sometimes significantly tailor the topics to their preferences. Other times, however, the school administration puts pressure on them and controls the topics. Do you hold “Conversations about Important Things”? How do your colleagues handle it? 

— Since I am not a homeroom teacher, I do not teach these lessons. Homeroom teachers usually teach them so that the school does not appear to be in opposition. The approach varies greatly from teacher to teacher.

Some organize an elective Russian language course instead of “Conversations about Important Things,” while others organize class hours. If it’s a graduating class, teachers use this time to talk about preparing for exams.

Some talk more or less about the assigned lesson topic. However, simply following the script and playing the video is ineffective. The children won’t look at the screen, and you won't be able to get them to talk because they feel like they’re being “fed” information.

— Does your school take a detached approach to topics related to war?

— All schools do so. Back in 2023, everyone got tired of this emotionally charged topic: supporters and opponents of the war, as well as those with relatives participating in it. Most people take a detached approach because it is impossible to live with this pain all the time. Some people still weave camouflage nets, but it's more of a ritual to reassure themselves. 

As I see it, by 2024 — or perhaps even earlier — teachers had learned to discuss these topics very cautiously. Depending on the degree of trust they had in their audience, they could talk about them more openly. Some people conduct “Conversations about Important Things” by simply following the manual. History teachers, for example, are not bothered by the presence of the last chapter on the “special military operation”; rather, they are bothered by the poor quality of the textbook, which was hastily put together and is methodologically weak. It contains terminology and wording that children cannot understand. However, teachers have accepted the last chapter about the “special military operation.” This is the world we live in, and we must teach children about it. Everyone more or less understands that this is simply a forced situation. Historians know that it will be reevaluated later.

— Were topics about the war discussed in your school’s social studies classes?

— Questions about war are not addressed there because the focus is on the structure of society, which makes the approach rather general. There are also advanced and regular social studies courses, and their curricula differ greatly. Two years ago, a reform was launched to reduce the number of hours devoted to social studies. Starting this year, most schools no longer offer social studies in grades six and seven. Some social studies teachers opposed this change and still do. Those in favor believe the curriculum is too complex and detached from real life. However, it all depends on the teacher. Teachers can make the entire curriculum relevant if they wish. Previously, schools could set the number of hours as they saw fit. Then, the Federal State Educational Standards were introduced, which clearly specified the number of hours.

— Of course, it must have been different for everyone, but I remember having discussions about world regimes in social studies classes. We could openly express opposing views and engage in debate. The teachers supported this. How is it now? Are students more afraid to speak up now?

— Social studies teachers vary greatly in terms of their level of training and their attitude toward the subject because it is very dry. Just try getting ordinary children to listen to a lecture on the different branches of law and how civil law differs from arbitration law! Teachers who want to spark interest use real-life examples. It’s impossible to generalize about the changes that have taken place since the war began.

Children are sometimes afraid to speak up because they know it’s dangerous.

Sometimes, they provoke the teachers themselves. For example, they may directly ask about the war in Ukraine to see how the teacher will respond. Teachers understand that they may be recorded. Their task is to maintain their dignity and avoid incriminating themselves. Children will respect this if they respect the teacher. 

It’s not that it has become difficult to have a discussion because something has changed. It’s just that it is generally difficult to teach this subject. It works well when students are motivated and have solid prior knowledge. Unfortunately, though, teachers often have to help students reach a level of understanding that will simply allow them to avoid thoughtlessly taking out loans. The level of education declines year after year, and teachers adapt to this decline. 

— Can students deliberately bring up these sensitive topics? Can teachers provoke students and parents? For example, consider the case of Alexei and Masha Moskalyova. 

— Of course, but this is no longer an internal school problem. Teachers have already taken a stance on the issue and are sticking to it. The same goes for provocations. Children provoke teachers in all sorts of ways. I just gave an example because the conversation turned to that topic, but the war in Ukraine is not the only issue being discussed. The media reports on high-profile cases of political conflict in schools. In most cases, however, the issue is resolved at the school level. For example, a student might draw an anti-war picture, his parents would be called in, and they would be told not to draw such pictures at school. Then, everyone would go their separate ways and get on with their lives. Of course, people understand that there are risks involved. However, with rare exceptions, no one wants to turn this into a major conflict involving law enforcement agencies.

— What is your strategy for responding to students who ask about your attitude toward war? How do you respond?

— In such cases, I usually say that I won’t discuss this topic with them because of censorship and repressive legislation in our country. They understand where I stand perfectly well. However, I must note that I have a trusting relationship with my students, and I don’t sense much desire on their part to provoke me. Furthermore, they are generally even more interested in discussing certain topics than I am. I am more concerned about teaching them social studies and equipping them with the tools to critically examine current events. I don’t think it’s appropriate for teachers to come to school and campaign for their political views. I have my own views, but I don’t believe it’s appropriate to use school as a place for agitation. I can only recommend the right books, ones that place the emphasis correctly. 

Even if you oppose war, how can you say such things to children whose fathers are on the front lines? They are already in a difficult situation at home. Once they understand what is happening, they have to choose sides and judge their own fathers. This is a complex ethical issue that should be avoided for now. At least, I don’t see a simple solution. Often, the problem isn’t that someone will report you, but that you don’t know what to say or how to say it. 

This isn’t the only topic like this. In a subject like “Family Studies,” for example, they constantly talk about the ideal family: mother, father, and how everyone loves each other. There’s even an assignment called “My Ideal Family.” However, many families are single-parent households, and children start to compare. I’ve read on teachers’ blogs and in chats that children have cried and run out of the classroom when asked about this because their parents are divorcing. If I had to teach a lesson on this topic, I wouldn’t follow the curriculum. 

What Schools Lack

— In your opinion, what are the main structural problems with modern school education today? 

— The main issue is that the authorities continue to cut costs, as they did before. As a result, only certain types of people work in schools, and they are not always the best fit. For example, among employees are often people who need a flexible schedule. Many women with children work in schools because they want to spend more time with their kids, especially during the holidays. They also want a long summer vacation, so they agree to very low salaries. There are also older teachers who are already retired but need additional income. At their age, it is no longer possible to switch to another profession. The third category consists of people who come from other industries after taking requalification courses. Staff turnover is very high. 

Additionally, teachers are not receiving adequate support for managing difficult children due to a shortage of psychologists and speech therapists, as well as the heavy workloads of other teachers. We lack an effective model for working with children who exhibit deviant behavior. If parents refuse to have their child evaluated by a psychiatrist or transferred to a special school and do not seek psychological help for them, the child can disrupt the entire school. At that point, we just give up. 

— There is a lack of funding and staff, which leads to problems when working with difficult teenagers. Are these the only structural problems in school education? 

— There are many problems, and it is impossible to describe them all at once. Schools are perceived as if they owe everything to everyone: parents and local education authorities. The demands placed on schools are so high that they cannot possibly meet them. As a result, everything boils down to putting on a show for higher authorities. The same applies to the upbringing system, which was actively implemented two years ago. At that time, many events were imposed from above, such as those around Victory Day. These events must be held within a week, even though classes continue as usual. Teachers often do this just for show. They take a group photo and report that the event took place even though the children spent only five minutes on it. 

— Meanwhile, schools began inviting veterans who had fought in Ukraine to participate in “Conversations about Important Things.” What effect might this have on children and the educational process? 

— What can they change? They can come to one “Conversation about Important Things” and talk about whatever they want. But will their children listen to them? They aren’t teachers, so they don’t know how to talk to children. A teacher friend of mine told me that someone like that was sent to his tenth-grade class. The visitor was tongue-tied and started talking about something, but the students weren’t interested and started doing their own things. He got angry and left disappointed. The children only asked him a couple of questions, such as, “Have you ever had to kill anyone?” The children tried to steer him toward topics that interested them. These military people they’re trying to send have no significance for schools, at least for now. 

— In summary, do I understand correctly that schools are in a position where propaganda clashes with the reality of everyday life, and the topic of war is often avoided, at least in your case? 

— Yes. Children have other sources of information that they find much more interesting. Most students don’t enjoy school, and they don’t find their teachers very authoritative. If an interesting teacher can inspire schoolchildren, then they may listen to them. 

It seems to me that the only lesson students are learning from their teachers’ behavior is that we must adapt to the situation and act as if we believe in everything. In other words, we simply must fake it.

‍ If your homeroom teacher asks you to stand up and take a photo with a poster, you take the photo, and no one cares what you really think. School is teaching them that now, not faith in the party and the government. 

Of course, one can hear the banal statements broadcast on television that are then probably indirectly conveyed by parents and teachers. For example, some claim that once the authorities began the large-scale invasion of Ukraine, there was no other option. Others say it’s a pity that so many people are dying, but that NATO was threatening us. These explanations circulate at the everyday level. However, children interested in politics can find many other opinions. They understand that teachers won’t answer their questions for various reasons, so schoolchildren don’t usually go to teachers with these questions. 

The media reported all sorts of horror stories about children being labeled with the letter Z at school, but, in my opinion, these were isolated cases. The main problem is that schools still fail to recognize children’s needs and create normal conditions for their development. Kindness and humanity are lacking in our educational system. Children with poor parental guidance often don’t receive adequate support at school, which can lead to social disadvantage and exploitation. 

Trade Unions and the Protection of Teachers’ Rights

— What about the protection of teachers’ labor rights? 

— Currently, there are no large mass organizations capable of protecting teachers. For instance, the All-Russian Education Union supports many of the proposals from the Ministry of Education.

Most teachers believe that trade unions are currently ineffective.

The Uchitel trade union is considered opposition — if one can even talk about opposition in today’s Russia — but it is simply unofficial. The union raises important issues related to teacher overload and the imposition of additional responsibilities. Last year, the union organized a mass campaign against forcing teachers and parents to use the Sferum educational platform. 

By the way, it’s ironic that after teachers partially switched to Sphereum, the authorities are now going to transfer us to Max, a state-owned messenger app, instead of Telegram or WhatsApp. I was shocked to learn that six regions are planning to switch to Max. Teachers, of course, see this as a complete mockery because they already have enough to do. 

The Uchitel trade union is raising this issue, but it can’t accomplish much. This is because few teachers are members, so the authorities do not view the union as a significant force. While the union may annoy the Ministry of Education and regional authorities, forcing them to consider some things more carefully and make minor changes, it cannot bring about radical change. For that, a larger union is needed. 

— Although the Uchitel trade union is unofficial, self-organization can be important. Since the official All-Russian Trade Union of Education does not defend teachers’ interests, why isn’t there a mass influx into the Uchitel trade union? 

— Teachers simply don’t have the time or energy. It’s an additional burden to find out what teachers at your school want and what problems they have, and to develop proposals for the principal. As a rule, the principal does not immediately engage in negotiations or constructive communication. Additionally, people are afraid of incurring the wrath of the school administration. It’s all part of a complex situation. 

— Do you know many teachers who are willing to take on this additional work?

— Of course, only a few. Trade union activism creates potential conflicts for teachers and brings the wrath of the school administration down upon them. That’s why people usually try to solve problems without unions. Additionally, principals perceive unions as a threat, as if they have united against them.

In the teaching community, compromise is more common.

In extreme cases, people resign or threaten to resign if the school administration does not meet their demands.

— There have always been few men working in Russian schools, and the salaries were low. How have the past three years of war in Ukraine affected women’s involvement in education in terms of gender?

— Women have always been attracted to the education sector because, most of the time, they can go home after classes and grade papers in the evening. However, many now have such heavy workloads that school doesn't end until four or five o'clock.

However, because most teachers are women, a vicious cycle is created: where there are many women, they are paid less. Employers believe that if women are doing the work, they can be paid less. This is a story about discrimination.

So, when they started saying that we would bring “special military operation” participants into schools… What salary would you offer them? Who would work for 20,000 rubles at a school where everyone is rude and they can’t respond? It’s an extremely unattractive job, except in the Far North and in Moscow, where teachers have relatively high salaries. Often, more proactive women leave to work as tutors or change jobs. Nevertheless, poverty persists.

The only war-related issue here is that inflation is far outpacing wage growth in the education sector. Even if wages increase slightly, it’s still insignificant. My situation is okay for now, but I know what my colleagues are going through.

Consequences for Future Generations

— Can we assess how current events in the world and in our country affect children?

— We will understand the consequences of war and the militarization of society and education much later. People often ask me how children react and what the future holds for us. However, the question of how well children grasp what adults teach them is not simple. If all sources of information are cut off permanently, then in ten years, we will probably see what everyone fears: significant changes, especially among young people.

Still, a lot is determined by the family, not by school or even television. This idea is not new, but many teachers are upset that children only want to earn a lot of money. Various TV series and mass media portray people, often men, who made money quickly and women who married well. The future is unclear for our children because no one has prepared a good life for them.

Teachers’ attempts to inspire them by telling them that we were the first in space and that we should help our elders often simply crash against the cynicism and pragmatism that children have picked up from the “big world.”

There is probably a silver lining to this: it’s impossible to force our authorities’ ideas on them, but it’s also difficult to promote something else, something more humanistic.

— Are you suggesting that the capitalist way of life has replaced the role that pro-war, pro-government propaganda once occupied?

— Generally speaking, yes. Children are primarily guided by the norms of the people around them. You could talk about the Great Patriotic War a hundred times, but schoolchildren would say that it was a long time ago and that people lived differently then. Defending the Motherland was normal, but times have changed. Now, what kind of car you drive is important. In this sense, neither “Family Studies” nor anything else can take root here. 

Many young people have embraced extremely liberal ideas. These ideas do not bind society together. We do not yet know where this generation will lead us. 

— What would you do if you could change the school educational system? 

— I know of a few schools that have created environments where children feel valued and loved. In these environments, children feel unique and loved regardless of their family background, qualities, or characteristics. When children are in such a stable environment for an extended period, they change. Even a caring homeroom teacher can do a lot for a child. However, conditions must be in place so that homeroom teachers are not overwhelmed with work and have time for the children.

‍