Official website of the President of Russia

Commissions and Councils   /

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon, colleagues,

This meeting is taking place ahead of Russian Science Day. First of all, I congratulate you, our country’s scientists, research teams, and technology teams on this holiday, and wish you successful and productive work for the benefit of Russia and all our people.

Increasing the role of science in addressing national goals was discussed in detail at the last meeting of our Council. Today, we will focus on technical education and training engineering staff and highly skilled workers for Russia’s priority areas of scientific and technological development, in which new national projects of technological leadership are being launched.

At the end of last year, the Government and the Russian Academy of Sciences were instructed to significantly expand the list of these issues and to add additional measures in order to ensure not just self-sufficiency of the country in the most important sectors, but the superiority of domestic knowledge-intensive technologies and products in critical areas.

To reiterate, the goal is very specific: Russia must be competitive in key areas of technological development. To achieve this, we need specialists that are capable of generating unique solutions, including for new emerging industries, and are properly trained to use advanced design and construction methods.

I would like to add that blue-collar professions in the manufacturing industry and many other sectors also require increased technological aptitudes in operating sophisticated systems and engineering competencies. Training such specialists is a matter of prime importance for all levels of education.

I would like to emphasise that in recent years we have been systematically engaged in improving our schools, colleges and universities. However, the situation in the economy and global competition is changing fast. Given the acute shortage of personnel, which is quite sensitive for manufacturing enterprises, we need to take outside-the-box, often extraordinary steps already now.

The participation of the entire professional community really matters. That is why an interagency working group has been created to draft a substantive agenda for our Council, which includes representatives from leading schools, universities, and research institutes, as well as officials from the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and business leaders.

I expect our colleagues to continue to monitor the situation regarding engineering education and prepare their proposals on this matter. Among other things, it is essential to adjust existing mechanisms of cooperation between regions, education systems, domestic companies and enterprises, and create new ones.

It is important to establish an ongoing exchange of the most effective practices. First of all, steps need to be taken to create an integrated, comprehensive system for training personnel for the technology sector – from school to university. Many of the Russian regions with a high concentration of industry have positive and much needed experience in this respect. We need to study their practices and spreads them.

There is another important point I would like to make. In addition to addressing current objectives and those of the immediate future, we need to create a reserve of competences for years to come, so that today’s schoolchildren, university students, postgraduates, as well as educational institutions – schools, colleges, and universities – would be ready to meet future challenges, handle rapid technological changes, and remain in the lead in the global competition even 15–20 years from now. This goal should be incorporated into the logic that guides our actions, and we should include it the new Education Development Strategy until 2040.

Importantly, we must take this overarching approach: our technical education should be, above all, fundamental, which is in line with Russian traditions and the best international practices that have proven their effectiveness. I am referring to the necessary baggage of knowledge in maths and science that students gain at school, as early as in grades 5–9. Experts believe that this is the most important period in fostering future tech specialists.

The quality of teaching these disciplines should be consistently high – not just in several top schools, but throughout the country. For this purpose, as it has been said many times, we need to increase the number of subject teachers and improve the quality of their training.

It is important that children become fascinated with maths and natural science subjects. At present, many of them often lose interest at the early stages of studying them. This certainly does not mean that our children lack talent or ability to excel in maths or science. One of the reasons for their lack of interest, as teachers themselves say, is the content of primary and basic school curricula.

The mathematics and natural science curricula need to be comprehensively reviewed and updated, to balance the amount of material, to make it easy to understand, clear and, most importantly, interesting for children of appropriate age. I ask the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Russian Academy of Education, and leading Russian educational and research organisations to address these challenges.

Colleagues,

In recent years, a series of systemic decisions have been adopted to enhance the quality of vocational training for engineers and technical workers.

This year marks the conclusion of the experimental phase of the Professionalitet project, which has been implemented since 2022 based on close cooperation between educational institutions and enterprises in key economic sectors. I consider it imperative to codify this model of secondary vocational education – with mandatory participation of businesses – into legislation.

This is particularly critical as the project is expanding significantly, extending to new industries. By the end of 2026, colleges and technical schools from all Russian regions will participate in it, and by 2030, two million students will be enrolled under the Professionalitet framework.

Regarding higher education, a decision was made in 2023 to introduce variable study durations across all disciplines, tailored to specific professions, industries, and labour market demands, while ensuring the attainment of comprehensive, accredited higher education qualifications.

Undoubtedly, these reforms must be substantiated with tangible content. To achieve this – amid rapid technological advancement – we must fundamentally re-evaluate the composition of curricula, the very mechanisms of instruction, and the scale and structure of workforce training, including, of course, what we are currently discussing: engineering personnel.

The Government – in collaboration with regional authorities and employers – has developed a five-year forecast of recruitment needs across the entire economy. This has been broken down by specific territories, industries, and professions. While substantial effort has been made, we are just at the beginning of the road.

We must now precisely identify additional personnel needs in order to attain technological leadership and implement corresponding national projects. The forecast must be expanded and refined, after which it can be employed to define the public enrolment parameters for colleges and universities. As agreed, this process will be conducted annually.

It is vital that state-funded placements in engineering disciplines are not diluted within general allocations but distributed strictly according to the needs of enterprises and industries, including those to be established from scratch under national technological leadership projects.

Consequently, in the shortest possible time, we must establish mechanisms for allocating so-called admission control figures and communicate them to specific educational institutions. Priority for state-funded placements must be granted to universities and colleges demonstrating superior training results – that is, leaders distinguished by graduates’ competitive salaries and employment in their field of study.

It is necessary to properly fine-tune the way the training process at higher education institutions is organised. The share of practical training in modern design and construction tools, which are already in use at specific enterprises, should be increased by an order of magnitude.

At the same time, outdated, sometimes obsolete courses and programmes that do not meet the needs of the economy must be removed. By the way, this is one of the key reasons for some students losing interest in their future professions and even making them drop out of educational institutions altogether.

In some engineering fields, up to 40 percent of students remain with incomplete higher education. These data – I think you will agree with me – speak volumes and simply reduce to zero our personnel training plans, which I just mentioned. I would like the Ministry of Science and Higher Education to submit proposals to improve this situation.

There is more to it. Combining learning and working has become the usual thing for a large number of students. The young people’s push to stand firm on their own feet and to try their hand in the real-life production process certainly deserves respect and, of course, must be supported in every way. In this regard, I have two proposals to make.

First of all, I believe it is necessary to introduce individual curricula for students whose current jobs are in the field of their future specialty, and to use hybrid formats of education, which – I emphasise – should not affect the thorough and fundamental nature of their studies, or the quality of training.

My other proposal concerns an option of phased-in professional training when developing the regulatory framework for a new national higher school model. This means that upon completion of a certain cycle, a student shall be entitled to undergo certification and obtain a professional credit and – if they wish so – to start working, and to continue studying later under basic or specialised higher education programmes. The same opportunities should be available to graduates of technical schools and colleges who may want to become engineers and to get higher education in the future.

In general, it is necessary to create conditions for continuous competence building of blue-collar workers, engineers and, of course, technical discipline teachers themselves. Technologies, equipment, machines, and software are making rapid strides and get updated now and then. Competitive domestic solutions and systems are becoming available. According to experts, anywhere from one third to one half of engineers and technicians who are already employed need to take advanced training courses.

In this regard, I am expecting you to come up with specific proposals to update and to significantly improve the quality and scope of additional professional development training.

Let us discuss these matters. If there is anything else you would like to discuss on top of that, you are welcome to do so, because this is an open discussion.

Our next speaker is CEO of Geoscan Group of Companies Pavel Stepanov, who also represents the interagency working group, and is a member of the Council for Science and Education.

<… >

Vladimir Putin: I would like to thank everyone for today’s work and for the substantive discussion.

Obviously, many of the proposals made today cannot be implemented by the relevant ministries alone – it is important for the entire Government to work in solidarity, also involving the professional community in the regions and businesses.

This is what I think we need to focus on specifically.

First, the foundations for the country’s technological leadership are primarily laid by educators, which means that teacher training programmes at universities need to seriously increase requirements for potential students aspiring to work as teachers of mathematics, physics, biology, or chemistry. In general, we need to achieve a higher quality of pedagogical and subject training for future teachers.

As you know, many programmes at classical universities are now adding pedagogical modules. I agree with the proposal to introduce similar courses in all technical universities from 2026, so that future mathematicians, physicists and engineers can obtain teaching qualifications if they wish. The modules should be available free of charge, and moreover, such students should be entitled to higher academic scholarships.

It is extremely important to stimulate children’s interest in science and engineering, and to support relevant initiatives coming from the scientific and professional community or public organisations, including the most massive youth movement – the Movement of the First. Our colleagues who spoke today shared their proposals, and we need to provide them with the necessary assistance.

Second, I ask the Government to update the five-year forecast of the economy’s demand for various personnel. I just mentioned this briefly, but we need to look into the substance of the issue and take into account our plans to increase labour productivity and robotisation.

The success of national projects focused on technological leadership, as well as state and business programmes aimed at the country’s spatial development, relies on effective staffing. Therefore, it is essential to establish clear objectives for specific colleges, universities, and higher education institutions as a whole.

In collaboration with the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, a new model for planning admission quotas should be developed. Applications from vocational education institutions for budget-funded places must receive backing from regional authorities and key employers. If a university or college demonstrates strong outcomes in employment training – I already mentioned this before – particularly in technological fields relevant to national projects, it should be prioritised for budget placements, including through direct government contracts.

Third, I ask the Government to implement a comprehensive set of decisions aimed at improving the quality of paid university admissions. In 2026, the process should follow new rules. These changes should prevent over-recruitment in fields that are not in demand by the economy or labour market, which we have discussed extensively. Specifically, training in such professions should not be allowed in non-specialised universities or their branches. I will not go into the specifics now, but sometimes it simply appears inappropriate, and the quality of training of specialists whom ultimately no one needs is subpar.

I fully support the proposals made by Valery Falkov [Minister of Science and Higher Education]. The key point is that preferential educational loans, with a three percent interest rate subsidised by the federal budget, should only be available for priority training areas and specialties that are essential for the state. Such a decision must undoubtedly be made.

Next. Today, we have extensively discussed the experience of leading universities and corporate educational centres. All best practices must be consolidated to ensure that cutting-edge knowledge and methodologies are accessible to educators at other technical universities and faculties, as well as to their students and postgraduate researchers.

In this regard, I believe it is necessary to develop exemplary curricula for engineering disciplines and facilitate the exchange of leading lectures on fundamental and specialised subjects across educational institutions. This entails creating a unified intellectual repository for Russia in the field of engineering education.

Broadly speaking, disjointed efforts in this sphere are unacceptable. I agree with those who have emphasised the need to consolidate resources and cultivate an environment where continuous development becomes both a norm and a vital imperative for every student and specialist. We must create corresponding opportunities for this collectively.

This includes establishing a system for internships in the real economy – a point reiterated repeatedly today by myself and by our colleagues – and organising dedicated platforms nationwide where engineers and industry practitioners can come together to devise solutions for complex technological challenges.

Undoubtedly, it is imperative to fully leverage supplementary professional education to address the shortage of engineering personnel. A comprehensive system for upskilling not only engineering and technical specialists but also instructors of specialised disciplines must be established, utilising the infrastructure of higher education institutions, colleges, corporate universities, and sectoral training centres.

I want to emphasise that these are just a few priorities for our forthcoming work. I instruct my colleagues from the Presidential Executive Office to review all proposals raised today and compile an exhaustive list of instructions within the next fortnight.

Additionally, the Future Technologies Forum is scheduled for the third decade of February. It will focus on the pivotal, cross-cutting theme of chemistry and advanced materials. We will definitely revisit personnel training matters in detail during this event.

I would like to thank you all for your participation and for the proposals put forward today. As Mikhail Kovalchuk [President of the National Research Centre Kurchatov Institute] rightly noted – particularly regarding personnel development – we must cultivate professionals by employing all modern means to achieve definitive outcomes.

Thank you very much. I wish you all the best!