All state educational institutions in Russia thoroughly monitor the psychological state of their students—and their political opinions. To achieve this, administrations conduct mass surveys, asking students about their well-being, their thoughts on the war, and their views on the government. These surveys, of course, are not anonymous.
Educational psychologists or other authorized staff review the results. Based on the ans, a student can be placed in a so-called “risk group,” which naturally attracts the attention of the siloviki (security forces).
The Groza media spoke with an educational psychologist from one of these institutions about how the monitoring system works and what young people actually feel about the government.
— Tell us about your role and what you do.
For example, we conduct tests at least four times a year. Mostly, the questions are the same; we are primarily tracking the “dynamics” of the answers over time. The people we send these tests to likely see these trends as well.
— Who has access to the survey results?
We, the psychologists, do—which makes sense. But not only us have access to the data-saving accounts.
— What happens after the tests are completed?
A “sensitive group” — essentially a risk group — is identified. This includes students deemed prone to “anti-social behavior”: drug addict, depression, suicidal thoughts, family problems, or even terrorism. We track all of it.
You might think these tests are meant to create a safe environment, but to be honest we do them just for the check mark. If we don’t meet the plan, the prosecutor's office will come to reprimand us.
An educational psychologist in a school today isn't someone who actually helps students. To put it bluntly, they are an informant. They should be a resource for moral support, but instead, they just hand the students over.
We are inspected constantly. Recently, I had five inspections from the FSB and two from the prosecutor’s office. On specific dates, Ministry of Internal Affairs’ officers come to check the personal files of students who are on the “watch list.”
— Why do they check them?
That’s a good question. To be honest, I don’t know.
But there was a case where a student wrote an essay about the war and called it "flagitious." After that the police came to check how we were "working" with him. They monitored his test results, too.
They even requested data on his brother, who also studied at the college. It goes that far.
The psychologist becomes the scapegoat. If a student writes an essay like that, it means the psychologist didn't "work hard enough" on the topic of patriotism.
— How did that essay reach the FSB?
Teachers bring them—either to the deputy director of educational work or the deputy director of academic affairs. From there, our institution has a direct contact at the FSB. They find out in various ways.
— And then the student is put in a "risk group"?
No, a student like that is put into the "special attention" category. It’s actually scarier to be there than in a risk group. That’s for people who have "distinguished" themselves—for example, if a student is caught with an organized crime group (which police might define as just 10 or 12 people sitting together).
— Or if they went to a protest?
Yes, or a protest. Or if they wrote the "wrong" essay. Basically, if they "expressed an anti-social position."
— How do you end up in a "risk group"?
— Does this happen automatically?
Not quite. The test results go to Moscow first for processing. Then they send us the list of those in the "risk zone."
— Let’s say a student falls into a "risk group." What happens next?
We are required to put such a student on an internal watch list. However, as I know, this information is also requested through Ministry of Internal Affairs channels. This means if I am asked for information on a specific student, I am obligated to provide it. Their file will essentially state that they are "not a patriot."
— So, the police just keep an eye on these students from then on?
Yes, and they monitor them very closely.
While our institution’s access to the bot is limited, Ministry of Internal Affairs’ officials have full access.
— If a student is "not a patriot," do you just call them in and tell them about the Movement of the First?
Of course, we hold these "educational chats." But most of the time, I have nothing to say to the student. A person has no idea why they’ve been summoned, and I can’t tell them why I called them. It turns into a total farce. The conversation goes nowhere because as psychologists, we are bound by "confidentiality" and cannot officially cite the survey results.
We are also supposed to involve these students in as many events as possible. I try to engage them, but I try not to be too heavy-handed. If I just snap at them, "Here, join the Movement of the First or "Go where you're told", how could they ever trust me as a psychologist? They wouldn't. And my primary job — even according to professional standards — is to protect the mental health of the students, not the "mental health" of the state.
For me, forcing a student to participate in something just because they "failed" a test is too much.
— You mentioned categories like "suicidal tendencies" or "increased aggression." What is the category for a student who "tends not to support the government"?
"Prone to extremism."
— I see... What other consequences are there?
The only thing I’m sure of is that this information resurfaces later—for example, when applying for jobs at high-security facilities or for government positions.
— What happens if a student refuses to take the surveys?
In our institution, we leave those students alone. It is possible to opt out. In fact, I actually recommend not taking them. Of course, there are psychologists elsewhere who don't allow students to refuse.
Even though we say that psychological testing—or any psychological intervention—is voluntary, we are required to ensure that 100% of students take part. 100% means around 1,300 students for a single psychologist.
— If a student just clicks random answers, is that monitored?
No. I have a student who is about to graduate and get his diploma—he was summoned to a drug clinic based only on the results of a socio-psychological test. He just clicked random answers because we asked him to do the test and he felt he couldn't refuse.
There have been cases where medical workers from drug clinics came to us. We are not taking students to a clinic; the medics come to the college with a box of express tests. Some of my students take prescription medications—anti-seizure drugs, for example. I asked them to bring their prescriptions, but the medics ignored it. Obviously, the tests came back positive, and suddenly we had "eight drug addicts" on our hands.
— On average, what are the results for your students right now? Do they know about the Movement of the First, or not really?
Honestly? More of them don’t know. Though I tell my students, "Please, just mark that you know what it is," because that’s what we have to do. Otherwise, we’ll be the ones getting in trouble.
All of the students are very different. Some fully support everything happening [in the country]. I had a graduating class that was very, very patriotic—they went into the army: some returned, others stayed on as contract soldiers.
At the end of the day, this generation has different values. You can try to convince them, telling how great everything is, but it won’t work. The institution was given money for "upbringing," but the students don't want it—they have different interests, a different outlook. They want to focus on their careers and self-development more than anything else.
— If an educational institution consistently shows "poor results" — for example, low recognition of the Movement of the First — what happens next?
Oh, I don’t want to know that (laughs). I already feel so much pressure. I can only imagine what would happen: the monitoring of "educational work" would become even harsher. But it’s already being watched so closely.
— So, the students are checked four times a year. Is the teaching staff checked at all?
No. The faculty is a separate story. I understand that because of staff shortages, they hire whoever they can... but even with a shortage, there are people I wouldn't risk hiring.
For example, we have a teacher who harasses female students. The scandal was swept under the rug, but he was banned from teaching female groups.
There are teachers who really shouldn't be working with children at all. In fact, based on their psychological state, it should be strictly forbidden. But somehow, they are still hired.
— What is your salary?
(laughs) I earn 20,000 rubles ($263,6) as a full-time educational psychologist and 13,500 rubles ($178) for a part-time role as a social educator. For my city, that is nothing. I pay 14,000 rubles ($184,5) a month for my rent, and that’s only because I got lucky. I spent 2.5 million rubles on my higher education just to end up working for 30,000 ($395,4) a month. I’d love to earn more, but the only thing I can get more of is paperwork.
At the same time, my job is presented to me as if I’m the Messiah at least. They tell us we are 'influencing the minds of others ☝️ But in reality—as I’ve told before—I am essentially just functioning as an informant."
– Who tells you that you are the Messiah because of your job?
It comes up during staff meetings and various conferences for educational psychologists. They tell us: "You earned a degree in psychology. Why? To help people find themselves." And where can people "best fulfill their potential"? In Russia, of course. And where can "future men" prove themselves? On the front lines of the Special Military Operation, of course.
