Svetlana E. Ziabreva

Background. On November 7–9, 2024, a significant event took place at Moscow University — the International Congress of Teachers and Lecturers of Russian Language and Literature, dedicated to the 225th anniversary of the birth of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, which was attended by leading Russian and foreign Pushkin scholars, teachers and methodologists, teachers of additional education, heads of educational institutions, teachers of Russian language and literature of higher educational institutions, cultural figures, employees of museums and libraries, representatives of public organizations and future philologists — graduate students, master’s students, students of Russian and foreign universities. The congress became a professional platform for discussing a wide range of issues related to understanding the place and role of the Pushkin tradition in Russian culture, preserving the foundations of national identity and value orientations of modern youth, educating the younger generation in the spirit of patriotism and readiness to serve the Fatherland.

Objectives. This article highlights the main areas of discussions on the development paths of Russian and foreign Pushkin studies and pedagogical innovations in the field of studying the legacy of A.S. Pushkin at schools and universities.

Methods. The methodological foundation of the article is the interdisciplinary approach and the structural and functional analysis of a set of problems associated with the study and teaching of Pushkin’s work in the modern cultural and historical context. The sources of data include materials presented in 378 reports and speeches by participants of the the International Congress of Teachers and Lecturers of Russian Language and Literature, dedicated to the 225th anniversary of the birth of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin.

Results. The analysis of the materials of the discussions and debates held at the congress leads to the conclusions about the need to carefully treat Pushkin’s heritage — the national treasure of Russia, to prevent the rethinking of Pushkin’s text when transforming it into new book formats; to intensify work on translating Pushkin’s works into the languages of the peoples of the Russian Federation and into the languages of the BRICS countries, to continue the study of translations of Pushkin’s texts into world languages; to recognize the methodology of a comprehensive study of the works of A.S. Pushkin at school and university, based on the synchronization of the socio-historical, literary and cultural-educational aspects of his work; to expand the use of media context in the study of the work of A.S. Pushkin at school and university based on knowledge of Russian history and culture with the involvement of works of musical and fine art, theater and cinema, Russian library and museum collections.

Conclusions. The scale of the discussions and the wide coverage of Pushkin issues in the scientific and methodological studies presented at the congress revealed a high need for the unification of efforts of the scientific and educational community to strengthen all-Russian spiritual and moral values and civic education of the younger generation, as well as for the regular holding of scientific, educational and cultural events to perpetuate the memory of the great poet.