On November 1, the Academic Council of St. This decision was made in connection with a number of malicious violations of various regulatory documents and contracted obligations to the university. Thus ended the conflict that had agitated academia in St. Petersburg for an entire month.
St. Petersburg Humanitarian University of Trade Unions & mdash; & nbsp; one of the most popular universities in Russia. The competition this summer was 69 people per seat. Applicants choose it due to good study conditions and 100% employment in the past 20 years. “ Of course, such results are achieved through strict discipline and a high level of standards, '' & mdash; celebrated at university. & nbsp; Sometimes up to 200 poor students and truants are kicked out per year. And this year & mdash; & nbsp; unprecedented story, expelled & nbsp; a whole bunch of offenders. & Nbsp;
The Council meeting lasted over 3 hours and began with the announcement of the report of the commission established on September 30. The task of the commission was to study in depth the activities of the students of the group in three main episodes:
& mdash; & nbsp; participation in illegal collection of money for former teachers of SPbGUP & nbsp; & mdash; spouses Levitskys and participation in Levitskys giving underground lessons during pandemic containment (academic year 2020/21);
& mdash; & nbsp; organization of a staged video shoot of fake 'fainting' one of the students in order to discredit the management of the university, a false call to the police by telephone and the dissemination of inaccurate messages with signs of defamation on the Internet and the media, which occurred on September 27, 2021;
& mdash; & nbsp; organization of riots, defamation and humiliation of teachers and university staff by students already during the work of the committee on October 12, 2021, which served as a basis for the judgment lessons for a group of students.
The commission conducted interviews for video recording with 25 students, 5 parents, interviewed witnesses of these events among the staff and students of the university, viewed a large amount of video material, including camera recordings of security in the building and on the territory of the university, the adjacent territory, studied the text and other materials, objectively reflecting the events mentioned, evaluated the collected materials and presented their findings to the Board.
It should be noted that the events mentioned, as well as the behavior of most of the students during the work of the commission, are unprecedented for the entire 95-year history of SPbGUP & nbsp; & mdash; of course the students were kicked out earlier, but not the whole group at once and only for truancy and poor academic performance.
As reported to the university, almost all of the students in the group violated the regulations of the President of the Russian Federation, the Minister of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, the Governor of Petersburg, the Rector of SPbGUP, as well as the Charter of SPbGUP, the Rules of Procedure for Students of SPbGUP and a number of provisions of the Education Agreements. On the facts of individual offenses, there is the prospect of initiating criminal and administrative proceedings.
The report contains a detailed scientific analysis of the social and psychological state of the group. Responsibility for the conflict is attributed to former teachers Levitsky, who during the educational process withdrew from the teaching methods adopted in St., using memory aids, answering questions about common patterns for the group, etc. The students interviewed were unfamiliar with the SPbGUP charter and their own study agreements, had strange ideas about their rights and no & mdash; & nbsp; about their responsibilities, some broadcast conversations with the board over the phone to parents online and repeated parents & # 39; answers to questions posed to students … All this is captured on video & raquo ;, & mdash; & nbsp; graded in college.
As a result, the Academic Council decided by two-thirds of the votes on a personal approach when deciding the expulsion.
& nbsp;