Education and Pedagogical Sciences

Sociology and social work

Linguistics and literary criticism

Informatics and Computer Engineering

Forms of study

88|7|5

Levels of Education

39

Admission Committee MSUPU

schedule Working mode:

Mon., Tue., Wed., Thu., Fri. from 10:00 to 18:00

Latest MSUPU reviews

Anonymous review 13:59 07/08/2017

Released this year. Faculty of Educational Psychology.

I am very pleased with the faculty, I especially liked the people with whom I studied and teachers (the coolest were in the third year).

When I entered I could not stand working with children, now I work in primary school and I am happy that I once chose this particular faculty.

I didn't like that there were long queues at the dining room during the big break.

Ekaterina Molokanova 15:17 03/15/2016

I am a graduate of the Faculty of Psychology of Education of the Moscow State University of Psychology and Education in 2014 (Master's program, Department of Preschool Pedagogy and Psychology). I remember with gratitude the teaching staff and all the employees of the University.

The university is equipped at a decent level, there is a good library, there is a canteen. I would especially like to note the relevance curriculum, the level of research work, support for student initiative, no corruption.

Teachers give everything...

MSUPU Gallery

general information

federal state budgetary educational institution higher education "Moscow State Psychological and Pedagogical University"

License

No. 02141 is valid Indefinitely from 05/17/2016

Accreditation

No. 02220 valid from 09/02/2016

Monitoring results of the Ministry of Education and Science for MSUPE

Indicator	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015	2014
Performance indicator (out of 5 points)	4	5	5	6	6	4
Average USE score in all specialties and forms of education	70.74	68.61	68.34	66.96	66.80	69.59
Average USE score credited to the budget	72.27	69.34	68.64	67.05	66.34	72.02
Average USE score enrolled on a commercial basis	63.21	62.09	62.4	64.72	56.79	61.37
The average for all specialties is the minimum USE score enrolled in the full-time department	57.47	53.57	56.01	52.94	52.38	51.77
Number of students	4528	4470	4396	4408	4797	4975
full-time department	3990	3877	3646	3496	3420	2916
Part-time department	332	345	411	492	660	876
Extramural	206	248	339	420	717	1183
All data

Dear applicants, before entering this institution for the Faculty of Extreme Psychology, think a million, no, a billion times whether you need it or not! And now in more detail. Diko wanted to enter this university at the Faculty of Extreme Psychology! And I was very happy when I found out that I passed! This is where all the fun ended ... And then such a "funny animal" as the Scribe appeared! No respect for students, especially for those who work (almost not put before a choice, either work or study). Neglect, indifference, insults and screams - that's what students get at this faculty. Let's start with studies: in the first half of the year it was still somehow interesting, but unfortunately there were few specialized subjects, you can count them on the fingers of one hand. Undoubtedly, some of them were interesting, time flew by on steam quickly. But this is the first half of the year, further studies - no! Couples rarely (maybe this is good for someone), no knowledge (do not forget that some people still want to get knowledge), boredom in couples or go through a bachelor's program. In the 2nd year, couples from the strength of pieces 5. There are no specialized subjects, there was a rumor that the institute simply did not allocate money for them, so no study, only couples about the master's thesis and this is such a pleasure. The head of the master's program, to put it mildly - FDI ... Tin. This woman Ekimova V.I. came off on the students only in this way, she ruffled her nerves with a bang. Through them, she asserted herself. In general, a person is not permanent. Today she made corrections to her diploma, and tomorrow she said that she did not do this and that all this was complete nonsense and to be redone again. She especially comes off on students who write diplomas from teachers with whom she has contradictions and personal hostility, because of this the student gets a nervous breakdown, does not know what to do, is in a tense state. He says that at state exams you need to answer briefly and to the point, but in fact, when a student answers briefly and to the point, the very essence, this teacher (she is also a member of the commission) on the exam says that you need to answer extensively, tell in more detail. And that the readiness of students for the state exam is low, not the level of the state. Well, excuse me, how they taught (and how I taught I wrote above). And then the student is just in Oh what a shock! In general, as the head of the master's program - horror. But there is a tiny plus - he teaches well and interestingly, but this is nonsense and a trifle compared to the rest of the trash. At the faculty, there is no consensus among teachers, everyone pulls the blanket over himself, says negative things about another teacher behind his back, and students suffer from this. When writing a dissertation, teachers say not to listen to anyone only them, and the head of the master's program says not to listen to teachers, but listen only to her, and it is not clear who to believe. About the work of the faculty. Pakhalkova AA works at the faculty, a lady who does not give accurate information or gives it too late, who herself makes mistakes, and at the same time blames everything on the students that they are to blame for everything, and when it turns out that she is still to blame, she does not even apologize , still pretends that the students are wrong. She is also not responsible for her words and pretends that she did not say them. And the most fun, prepare money for reviewers. Yes, they collected money from us for reviewers, with the words “just don’t write about it anywhere, otherwise we already had problems with corruption”, in general, they are quietly doing this. The reviewers wrote a review about the master's thesis, and some of the reviews were not positive, and these reviews did not give any advantages on the defense itself, well, there they are, for show. All the same, the commission put the marks and the reviews were not taken into account, that is, in fact, they are not needed, but the money was returned. It is not clear on what basis the commission evaluates. There were cases when a person did not answer anything at all and they gave him 5, and people who answered at least something were given 4. Well, in addition, I want to say that the university issues diplomas without a crust, only inserts and students themselves ordered and paid for crusts for their diplomas. I hope the review is useful to you and I repeat think carefully before going to this faculty. After all, nerves are not restored, but still you want to be a healthy person! Good luck to all!