Deliberate failure to comply with the requirements of the prosecutor arising from his powers established federal law, as well as the legal requirements of the investigator, inquiry officer or official conducting proceedings in the case of administrative offense, -
shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine on citizens in the amount of one thousand to one thousand five hundred rubles; for officials - from two thousand to three thousand rubles or disqualification for a period of six months to one year; on legal entities- from fifty thousand to one hundred thousand rubles or administrative suspension of activities for up to ninety days.
Note. The provisions of this article do not apply to matters regulated by criminal procedure legislation Russian Federation relations related to the prosecutor's supervision of the procedural activities of the inquiry bodies and preliminary investigation bodies.
Commentary to Art. 17.7 Code of Administrative Offenses
In accordance with paragraph 31 of Art. 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the prosecutor is the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation and the prosecutors subordinate to him, their deputies and other officials of the prosecutor's office participating in criminal proceedings and vested with the corresponding powers by the federal law on the prosecutor's office. An investigator is an official authorized to carry out a preliminary investigation in a criminal case, as well as other powers provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (clause 41 of Article 5). An investigator is an official of the inquiry body who is authorized or authorized by the head of the inquiry body to carry out a preliminary investigation in the form of an inquiry, as well as other powers provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (clause 7 of Article 5). As for officials carrying out proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, in accordance with Art. 22.1 and 22.2 of the Code of Administrative Offences, cases of administrative offenses are considered within the competence established by Chapter 23 of the Code of Administrative Offenses:
1) judges (magistrates);
3) federal authorities executive power, their institutions, structural divisions and territorial bodies, as well as other government agencies, authorized to do so based on the tasks and functions assigned to them by federal laws or regulatory legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation or the Government of the Russian Federation.
Cases of administrative offenses, provided for by laws subjects of the Russian Federation are considered within the powers established by these laws:
1) justices of the peace;
2) commissions on affairs of minors and protection of their rights;
3) authorized bodies and institutions of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
4) administrative commissions and other collegial bodies created in accordance with the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
Cases of administrative offenses are considered, within the limits of their powers, by the officials specified in Chapter 23 of the Code of Administrative Offences, on behalf of the bodies specified in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Art. 22.1 Code of Administrative Offences. Cases of administrative offenses on behalf of the relevant authorities are authorized to consider:
1) heads of the relevant federal executive authorities, their institutions, and their deputies;
2) managers structural divisions And territorial bodies relevant federal executive authorities, their deputies;
3) other officials performing supervisory or control functions in accordance with federal laws or regulatory legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation or the Government of the Russian Federation.
Cases of administrative offenses provided for by the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, on behalf of the bodies specified in clause 3 of part 2 of art. 22.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences, are considered by authorized officials of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
As the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation indicated in its Resolution of June 6, 2003 in case No. 86-B03-9, administrative liability is imposed for deliberate failure to comply with the legal requirements of the prosecutor, i.e. requirements arising from his powers established by federal law. This clarification This is also true for other officials mentioned in the commented article.
The powers of the prosecutor are established by various legislative acts, first of all, Federal Law of November 17, 1995 N 168-FZ “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation” (as amended), as well as criminal procedural and criminal executive legislation; the powers of the investigator and the interrogating officer are different articles of the Code of Criminal Procedure; powers of officials carrying out proceedings in cases of administrative offenses - accordingly, different articles of the Code of Administrative Offenses. The objective side of the offense in question is the failure to comply with the requirements arising from these powers.
The subject of the offense in question are the citizens and officials to whom these requirements are addressed.
From the subjective side, failure to provide information can only be committed intentionally due to direct instructions Code of Administrative Offences.
Judicial practice under Article 17.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 14, 2017 N 46-AD17-4
Judge Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Merkulov V.P., having considered the complaint of Torokhtienko S.L. on the decision of Judge Klyavlinsky that entered into legal force district court Samara region dated 07/18/2016 N 5-13/2016, decision of the judge of the Samara Regional Court dated 09/08/2016 N 12-411/2016 and resolution of the deputy chairman of the Samara Regional Court dated 12/09/2016 N 4a-1377/2016, issued in relation to the chairman of the Meeting of Representatives rural settlement Klyavlino station municipal district Klyavlinsky, Samara region Torokhtienko S.L. (hereinafter referred to as Torokhtienko S.L.) in the case of an administrative offense under Article 17.7
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 21, 2017 N 18-AD17-7
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.P. Merkulov, having considered the complaint of defense attorney E.G. Ganeev, acting on the basis of a power of attorney in the interests of the administration municipality city of Novorossiysk, on the decision of the magistrate of court district No. 248 of Novorossiysk Krasnodar region dated April 12, 2016, the ruling of the judge of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Novorossiysk, Krasnodar Territory, dated April 29, 2016, the ruling of the magistrate of judicial district No. 82 of Novorossiysk, Krasnodar Territory, dated June 23, 2016 and the ruling of the deputy chairman of the Krasnodar Regional Court dated August 18, 2016, issued in the case of an administrative offense under Article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, in relation to the administration of the municipal formation of the city of Novorossiysk,
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 20, 2017 N 59-AD17-2
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.P. Merkulov, having considered the protest of the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation L.G. Korzhinek. to the decision of the Deputy Chairman of the Amur Regional Court dated September 21, 2016, issued in relation to the acting. Chief Physician of the State Budgetary Healthcare Institution JSC "Selemdzhinskaya Hospital" Orlikova S.A. in a case of an administrative offense provided for in Article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated April 3, 2017 N 25-AD17-1
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.B. Nikiforov, having considered the complaint of A.D. Franchuk on the decision of the judge of the Akhtubinsky District Court that has entered into legal force Astrakhan region dated May 31, 2016, decision of the judge of the Astrakhan Regional Court dated July 29, 2016 and resolution of the acting. Chairman of the Astrakhan Regional Court dated October 17, 2016, issued against the head of the administration of the municipal formation "Bataevsky Village Council" Franchuk A.D. in a case of an administrative offense provided for in Article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,
Decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 25, 2017 N 9-AAD17-1
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.P. Merkulov, having considered in open court hearing complaint general director LLC PKF "KVARTS" Kuzina D.V. against the ruling of the judge of the Nizhny Novgorod Regional Court dated February 17, 2017 on the return of the complaint filed against the decision of the judge of the Sormovsky District Court. Nizhny Novgorod dated December 28, 2016, issued in a case of an administrative offense under article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences, in relation to LLC PKF "QUARTS",
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated July 3, 2017 N 13-AD17-4
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.P. Merkulov, having considered the complaint of the defender O.A. Bulgakova, acting on the basis of a power of attorney in the interests of D.V. Chernikov, against the decision of the magistrate of the Nikiforovsky district of the Tambov region dated June 10, 2016, which entered into legal force. (hereinafter the date of production of the resolution in in full), the decision of the judge of the Nikiforovsky District Court of the Tambov Region dated August 10, 2016 and the decision of the Deputy Chairman of the Tambov Regional Court dated October 20, 2016, issued against the General Director of Rekon LLC Chernikov D.V. in a case of an administrative offense provided for in Article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 2, 2017 N 18-AD17-27
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Nikiforov S.B., having considered the complaint of Timoshin S.V. on the decision of the judge of the Kurganinsky District Court of the Krasnodar Territory dated December 27, 2016 N 5-345/2016, the decision of the judge of the Krasnodar Regional Court dated February 1, 2017 N 12-319/2017 and the decision of the Deputy Chairman of the Krasnodar Regional Court dated March 14, 2017 N, which entered into legal force 4a-485/17, issued against the head of the Temirgoevsky rural settlement of the Kurganinsky district of the Krasnodar Territory Timoshin S.V. (hereinafter - Timoshin S.V.) in the case of an administrative offense under Article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 2, 2017 N 18-AD17-28
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Nikiforov S.B., having considered the complaint of Timoshin S.V. on the decision of the judge of the Kurganinsky District Court of the Krasnodar Territory dated December 27, 2016 N 5-319/2016, the decision of the judge of the Krasnodar Regional Court dated February 1, 2017 N 12-320/2017 and the decision of the Deputy Chairman of the Krasnodar Regional Court dated March 14, 2017 N, which entered into legal force 4a-484/17, issued against the head of the Temirgoevsky rural settlement of the Kurganinsky district of the Krasnodar Territory Timoshin S.V. (hereinafter - Timoshin S.V.) in the case of an administrative offense under Article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated September 1, 2017 N 56-AD17-17
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Nikiforov S.B., having considered the complaint of the defender Miz V.K., acting on the basis of a power of attorney in the interests of LLC "Trading House "Taezhnik", against the decision of the judge of the Ussuriysky District Court of the Primorsky Territory dated March 10, 2016, which entered into legal force g., the decision of the judge of the Primorsky Regional Court dated April 25, 2016 and the resolution of the deputy chairman of the Primorsky Regional Court dated October 10, 2016, issued against LLC "Trading House "Taezhnik" in the case of an administrative offense under Article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 2, 2017 N 45-AD17-15
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.B. Nikiforov, having considered the complaint of Pyotr Semenovich Bakula against the ruling of the magistrate of court district No. 5 of Kirovsky that entered into legal force judicial district Yekaterinburg dated December 23, 2016 (hereinafter the date of the full resolution), the decision of the judge of the Kirovsky District Court of Yekaterinburg dated February 7, 2017 and the decision of the deputy chairman of the Sverdlovsk Regional Court dated March 10, 2017, issued in regarding the chairman of the Housing and Operational Cooperative N 194 Bakuly Petr Semenovich in the case of an administrative offense under Article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,
Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 30, 2017 N 30-AD17-2
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.P. Merkulov, having considered the complaint of Kazbekov Taimuraz Eduardovich against the decision of the magistrate of the judicial district No. 7 of the judicial district of Cherkessk, Karachay-Cherkess Republic dated September 14, 2016, which entered into legal force, the decision of the judge of the Cherkessk City Court of Karachaevo -Cherkess Republic dated December 9, 2016 and the resolution of the Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic dated March 22, 2017, issued against the director of Cossack LLC Kazbekov Taimuraz Eduardovich in the case of an administrative offense under the article 17.7 Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,
In accordance with the Law of the Russian Federation “On Education”, education standards (or educational standards) have been introduced in our country.
The concept of “standard” comes from the Latin word “standard”, meaning “sample”, “norm”, “measure”. Under education standard is understood a system of basic parameters accepted as the state standard of education, reflecting the social ideal and taking into account the possibilities real personality and educational systems to achieve this ideal.
Main objects of standardization in education are: its structure, content, volume of teaching load and level of students’ preparation. The norms and requirements established by the standard are accepted as a standard when assessing the quality of the main aspects of education.
What caused the standardization of education?
The need to standardize education is caused by fundamental changes in the field of education as a social phenomenon. Russia's turn to democracy, to market relations, and to individual rights and freedoms required a rethinking of education policy. The sphere of education is now focused primarily on satisfying the spiritual needs of the individual, and not on the interests of the state. This in turn led to significant changes in the organization of education. Educational institutions have acquired greater independence in selection of content, forms and methods of teaching.
The standardization of education is also associated with the fact that the transition of schools to new, freer forms of organizing the educational process, a change in the status of many schools, the introduction of new curricula, a freer choice by schools of academic subjects and volumes of study of the latter, the introduction of alternative textbooks, the creation of new educational technologies, multi-level and differentiated education - all this required concern for maintaining the basic unity of the educational space, allowing for a uniform level of education received by students in different types general educational institutions (lyceums, colleges, secondary schools, both state, municipal, and non-state, private). The state educational standard is the mechanism that ensures the existence of a unified educational space in the country.
The standardization of education is also caused by Russia’s desire to enter the system world culture, which requires, when forming general education, to take into account achievements in this area of international educational practice. This provides Russian citizens with recognition of their educational documents abroad.
The idea of standardizing education is not new for Russia. It existed back in Soviet time. Although in the USSR, as a rule, the concept of a state educational standard was not used, its role was actually fulfilled by united educational plans. They went down to the republics and were the basis of the actual curriculum of schools. The curricula and plans of those years were characterized by excessive ideologization, limiting teachers’ initiative and students’ ability to choose the content of education in accordance with their interests and abilities. But nevertheless, unified curricula seemed to level out education throughout the entire territory of the Soviet Union. In fact, the idea of introducing educational standards was tested in practice.
The currently existing state educational standards do not comply with educational process rigid template, but, on the contrary, open up wide opportunities for pedagogical creativity, to create variable programs and various teaching technologies around the mandatory core of content (which is the standard).
State educational standards are developed on a competitive basis, updated at least once every 10 years, established by federal law, and are mandatory for implementation by all educational institutions in the country, regardless of subordination, types and forms of ownership.
The educational standard has three components: federal, national-regional and school.
Federal component standard defines those standards, compliance with which ensures unity pedagogical space Russia, as well as the integration of the individual into the system of world culture. Federal component provides a basic standard of education in various subjects throughout the country.
National-regional component The standard defines those standards that fall within the competence of the regions (for example, in the field of native language and literature, geography, art, labor training, etc.). Due to the national-regional component, the needs and interests in the field of education of all peoples of the countries and the national uniqueness of culture are taken into account.
School component the content of education reflects the specifics and focus of an individual educational institution. Due to the school component, taking into account the federal and national-regional components, each school itself determines the amount of educational time allocated to the study of certain educational subjects, depth and nature of their study depending on the type educational institution.
The federal component of the standard is its unchanging part, which is revised extremely rarely; national-regional and school components- variable parts that are systematically updated and revised.
In 2001, an experiment began on the transition to a twelve-year school. Introduced into the experimental basic curricula of general education institutions from the first to the twelfth grades student component. Due to the hours of the student component, new forms and methods of organizing the educational process are implemented, providing personal orientation, including the organization of individual and group search and research work, project and active-motor activities of students.
Probably every person wants to give their child quality education. But how can you determine the level of training if you have nothing to do with pedagogy? Of course, with the help of the Federal State Educational Standard.
What is Federal State Educational Standard
A list has been approved for each education system and educational institution mandatory requirements aimed at determining each level of training in a profession or specialty. These requirements are combined within a framework that is approved by authorities authorized to regulate educational policy.
The implementation and results of mastering programs in state educational institutions cannot be lower than those specified in the Federal State Educational Standard.
In addition, Russian education assumes that without mastering the standards it will be impossible to obtain a state document. The Federal State Educational Standard is a certain basis thanks to which a student has the opportunity to move from one level of education to another, as if on a ladder.
Goals
Federal state educational standards are designed to ensure the integrity of the educational space of Russia; continuity of the main programs of preschool, primary, secondary, vocational and higher education.
In addition, the Federal State Educational Standard is responsible for aspects of spiritual and moral development and education.
The requirements of the educational standard include strict deadlines receiving general education And vocational education taking into account all possible forms of training and educational technologies.
The basis for the development of indicative educational programs; programs of academic subjects, courses, literature, control materials; financial supply standards educational activities specialized institutions implementing the educational program is the Federal State Educational Standard.
What is the standard for public education? First of all, these are the principles of organization educational process in institutions (kindergartens, schools, colleges, universities, etc.). Without the Federal State Educational Standard it is impossible to monitor compliance with the legislation of the Russian Federation in educational field, as well as conduct final and intermediate certification students.
It is worth noting that one of the goals of the Federal State Educational Standard is internal monitoring. With the help of standards, the activities of methodological specialists are organized, as well as certification teaching staff and other personnel educational institutions.
Training, retraining and advanced training of education workers are also within the sphere of influence of state standards.
Structure and implementation
Federal law stipulates that each standard must include three types of requirements.
Firstly, the requirements for (the ratio of parts of the main program and their volume, the ratio of the mandatory part and the share that is formed by the participants in the educational process).
Secondly, the implementation conditions are also subject to stringent requirements (including personnel, financial, technical).
Thirdly, the result. The entire educational program should develop certain (including professional) competencies in students. The GEF lesson is designed to teach you how to apply all acquired skills and knowledge and act successfully on their basis.
Of course, this is not the constitution of all educational institutions. This is just the beginning of the vertical, with the main recommendation positions. At the federal level, on the basis of the Federal State Educational Standard, an approximate educational program is being developed, focusing on local specifics. And then educational institutions bring this program to perfection (even interested parents can participate in the last process, which is regulated by law). Thus, Russian education from a methodological point of view can be represented in the form of a diagram:
Standard - sample program federal level - educational institution program.
The last point includes aspects such as:
- syllabus;
- calendar schedule;
- work programs;
- assessment materials;
- methodological recommendations for subjects.
Generations and differences in Federal State Educational Standards
What's happened state standard, they knew back in Soviet times, since strict regulations existed even then. But this particular document appeared and came into force only in the 2000s.
Federal State Educational Standard was previously called simply educational standard. The so-called first generation came into force in 2004. The second generation was developed in 2009 (for primary education), in 2010 (for basic general education), in 2012 (for secondary education).
GOST standards for higher education were developed in 2000. The second generation, which came into force in 2005, was aimed at students receiving ZUMs. Since 2009, new standards have been developed aimed at developing general cultural and professional competencies.
Until 2000, for each specialty, a minimum of knowledge and skills that a person graduating from a university should have was determined. Later these requirements became more stringent.
Modernization continues to this day. In 2013, the Law “On Education” was issued, according to which new programs for higher professional and pre-professional education are being developed. school education. Among other things, the clause on the preparation of scientific and teaching staff was firmly included there.
How do the old standards differ from the Federal State Educational Standard? What are next generation standards?
Main hallmark is that in modern education The development of the personality of pupils (students) is put at the forefront. Generalizing concepts (Abilities, skills, knowledge) disappeared from the text of the document and were replaced by more clear requirements, for example, real types of activities that every student must master were formulated. Great attention is paid to subject, interdisciplinary and personal results.
To achieve these goals, previously existing forms and types of training were revised, innovative educational space classes (lesson, course).
Thanks to the changes introduced, the student of the new generation is a free-thinking person, capable of setting goals for himself, solving important problems, creatively developed and able to adequately relate to reality.
Who develops standards?
Standards are replaced with new ones at least once every ten years.
The Federal State Educational Standards of general education are developed according to levels of education; the Federal State Educational Standards of vocational education can also be developed according to specialties, professions and areas of training.
The development of the Federal State Educational Standard is carried out taking into account:
- acute and long-term needs of the individual;
- development of the state and society;
- education;
- culture;
- Sciences;
- technology;
- economics and social sphere.
The educational and methodological association of universities is developing the Federal State Educational Standard for higher education. Their project is sent to the Ministry of Education, where discussion takes place, edits and adjustments are made, and then submitted for independent examination for a period of no more than two weeks.
The expert opinion is returned to the Ministry. And again a wave of discussions is launched by the council on the Federal State Educational Standard, which decides whether to approve the project, send it for revision or reject it.
If changes need to be made to the document, it goes through the same path from the very beginning.
Elementary education
The Federal State Educational Standard is a set of requirements necessary for the implementation of primary education. The three main ones are results, structure and conditions of implementation. All of them are determined by age and individual characteristics, and are considered from the point of view of laying the foundation for all education.
The first part of the standard indicates the period for mastering the basic primary program. It is four years.
It provides:
- equal educational opportunities for all;
- spiritual and moral education of schoolchildren;
- continuity of all preschool and school education programs;
- preservation, development and mastery of the culture of a multinational country;
- democratization of education;
- formation of criteria for assessing the activities of students and teachers4
- development conditions individual personality and creation special conditions education (for gifted children, children with disabilities).
It is based on a systems-activity approach. But the primary education program itself is being developed methodological advice educational institution.
The second part of the Federal State Educational Standard outlines clear requirements for the outcome of the educational process. Including personal, meta-subject and subject learning outcomes.
- Formation of ideas about the diversity of the country's linguistic space.
- Understanding that language is an integral part of national culture.
- Forming a positive attitude towards correct speech(and writing) as part of general culture.
- Mastery of the primary norms of the language.
The third part defines the structure of primary education extracurricular activities, programs individual items, which includes thematic planning according to the Federal State Educational Standard).
The fourth part contains requirements for the conditions for the implementation of the educational process (personnel, finance, logistics).
Secondary (complete) education
The first part of the standard on requirements is partially repeated and echoes the Federal State Educational Standard on primary education. Significant differences appear in the second section, where we're talking about about learning results. The necessary standards for mastering certain subjects are also indicated, including Russian language, literature, foreign language, history, social studies, geography and others.
The emphasis is on students, highlighting such main points as:
- education of patriotism, assimilation of the values of a multinational country;
- formation of a worldview that corresponds to the level of reality;
- mastering the norms of social life;
- development of an aesthetic understanding of the world, etc.
The requirements for the structure of educational activities have also been modified. But the sections remained the same: target, content and organizational.
Higher levels
The Federal State Educational Standard for higher education is built on the same principles. Their differences are obvious; the requirements for the structure, result and conditions of implementation cannot be the same for different educational levels.
Secondary vocational education is based on a competency-based approach, i.e. people are given not just knowledge, but the ability to manage this knowledge. When leaving an educational institution, a graduate should say not “I know what,” but “I know how.”
Based on the generally accepted Federal State Educational Standard, each educational institution develops its own program, focusing on the profile focus of the college or university, the availability of certain material and technical capabilities, etc.
The Methodological Council takes into account all recommendations of the Ministry of Education and acts strictly under its guidance. However, the adoption of programs of specific educational institutions is the responsibility of local authorities authorities and education departments of the region (republic, territory).
Educational institutions must take into account and implement recommendations regarding educational materials (for example, Federal State Educational Standards textbooks have taken their rightful place in libraries), thematic planning etc.
Criticism
On the way to approval, the Federal State Educational Standard went through many amendments, but even in its current form, the education reform receives a huge amount of criticism, and received even more.
In fact, in the minds of the developers of the standard, it was supposed to lead to the unification of everything Russian education. But everything turned out the other way around. Some found advantages in this document, others found disadvantages. Many teachers, accustomed to traditional education, it was difficult to switch to new standards. The Federal State Educational Standards textbooks raised questions. However, in everything you can find positive points. Modern society does not stand still, education must change and changes depending on its needs.
One of the main complaints against the Federal State Educational Standard was its lengthy formulations, the lack of clear tasks and real requirements that would be presented to students. Entire opposing groups emerged. According to the Federal State Educational Standard, everyone was required to study, but no one gave explanations on how to do this. And teachers and teaching specialists had to cope with this locally, including everything necessary in the program of their educational institution.
Topics on the Federal State Educational Standard have been raised and will continue to be raised, since the old principles, in which knowledge was the main thing in education, have become very firmly entrenched in everyone’s life. New standards, in which professional and social competencies, will continue to find their opponents for a long time.
Bottom line
The development of the Federal State Educational Standard turned out to be inevitable. Like everything new, this standard has caused a lot of controversy. However, the reform took place. To understand whether it is successful or not, at a minimum, you need to wait until the first graduation of students. Interim results are uninformative in this regard.
On this moment Only one thing is certain - more work for teachers.