Educational issues traditionally lay in the centre in the discourse of the Russian conservatism in the 19th century. Representatives of its different trends (Slavophiles, Katkov’s followers, aristocrates) regularly emphasized that this sphere was the key to resolving most of the problems the country faced: the necessity to develop the country and at the same time to “protect” — not only the existing political regime but also the historical continuity, national and spiritual values. The objects of criticism of conservative publicists were, as a rule, new trends in the educational sphere. However, the methods of dealing with them were perceived differently by different conservatives. In the end, the program of M. N. Katkov, which implied the spread of the classical model of the secondary school and the transformation of universities according to the German model, won. However, it aroused serious objections in conservative circles as well. The elementary school, which most conservatives traditionally associated with the Orthodox clergy, caused the least controversy. Regional specifics also played their role: educational issues were intertwined with the national ones as in the western periphery university and school were perceived as tools of combating “Polonism”. At the same time, one of the first demands of the Ukrainophiles was schooling in the “Little Russian dialect”. The press of the “Russian direction” actively opposed this — first of all, “Moskovskie Vedomosti” and “Novoe Vremia”. The largest regional conservative newspaper “Kievlianin”, founded by V. Ya. Shulgin, generally followed their program under his successor D. I. Pikhno but took a special view on educational issues, while showing a significant degree of independence and even liberalism. The latter was not only a consequence of the personal position of the editors. Publicism of “Kievlianin” reflected the views of the circle of Russian nationalist intelligentsia formed in post-reform Kiiv who managed to help the authorities solve the problem of “de-Polonization” of the Southern-Western territory but played a role in the subsequent great upheavals.