2015. no2

Educational Policies


Marek Kwiek - Professor, University of Poznan, Poland; Director, Center for Public Policy Studies; Chairholder, UNESCO Chair in Institutional Research and Higher Education Policy. Address: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza, ul. H. Wieniawskiego 1, 61–712 Poznan, Poland. E-mail: kwiekm@amu.edu.pl

The argues that welfare state reforms and higher education reforms are closely linked to increasing intergenerational conflicts over public resources in aging societies, and reforms pressures are linked to the shrinking tax base, the power of neoliberal ideology, and changing social attitudes across Europe. The indirect impact of aging societies on all public sector services will lead to growing pressures on all public expenditures and to increased competition for public funding. A new context of university reforms in Europe is therefore defined in this paper as welfare state reforms. The paper discusses global agenda-setting and global diffusion of ideas; the impact of aging societies on intergenerational conflicts over public priorities (and public resources); globalization and pressures on welfare states; “university attitudes”, parallel to “welfare attitudes”; post-industrial societies; the role of supportive discourses in the survival of public institutions; and the role financial and ideological pressures, as well as of changing social beliefs, in reforming European welfare states and higher education.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-8-39


Tatyana Mertsalova - Candidate of Sciences in Pedagogy, Lead Researcher, Institute of Education, National Research University—Higher School of Economics. Address: 20 Myasnitskaya str., 101000, Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: tmertsalova@hse.ru

Based on results of a series of studies in the area of information demand and supply that have been shaping within the Russian education system in the last 3–5 years (monitoring studies covering the population of the most part of Russia as well as community polls among parents and teachers) it has been discovered that the education system openness has been growing and is approaching 100% with education running ahead of other social services. The author is raising a question, whether it is possible to judge the efficiency of information supply based on numbers reflecting the extent of filling information resources with content, and whether it is possible to complete the development work in that area having reached peak values. The system of informational openness of Russian education unlike business area shall be considered three-sided rather than two-sided with the third and the most active side being the government. The situation with informational openness in Russian education can be described as an extensive development of information resources being performed mostly under the influence of governmental regulatory control. Having said that, the development efficiency study even as a part of a task set by the government gives reasons for considering it as the one not being sufficiently efficient.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-40-75

Theoretical and Applied Research


John Aubrey Douglass - Senior Research Fellow, Center for Studies in Higher Education (CSHE) at the University of California—Berkeley. Address: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley, 771 Evans Hall #4650, Berkeley, CA 94720–4650. E-mail: douglass@berkeley.edu

The argument that cultural and other forms of diversity enhance the educational experience of all students is generally associated with post‑1960 efforts to expand the presence of disadvantaged groups on the campuses of America’s universities and colleges. Yet, in the case of UC Berkeley, arguments on the merits of cultural diversity have much earlier roots in the historical enrollment of international students. Debates in the late 1800s and early twentieth century revolved around the appropriateness of enrolling foreign students, particularly those from Asia. The result was an important intellectual discussion on the merits of diversity that was eventually reframed to focus largely on underrepresented domestic students. In this short essay, I discuss how the notion of diversity, and its educational benefits, first emerged as a value at UC Berkeley. I then briefly discuss the significant increase of international students at UC Berkeley and other public universities. Thus far, the primary impetus of this increase has been mostly financial Berkeley has faced significant public disinvestment, seeks new revenue sources, and can charge international students tuition rates similar to elite private colleges and universities. By targeting 20 percent of all undergraduates as international or out-of-state (US-resident non-Californians)—the majority international—the Berkeley campus is essentially diversifying its student body. How does having more globally inclusive enrollment fit into our contemporary ideas of diversity? I attempt a brief discussion of this question and the policy challenges generated by the dramatic increase in international students at the undergraduate level at Berkeley and other UC campuses.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-76-108


Andrey Lovakov - Junior Researcher, International Scientific and Academic Laboratory of Institutional Analysis of Economic Reforms, Institute of Institutional Studies, National Research University—Higher School of Economics. Address: 20 Myasnitskaya str., 101000, Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: lovakov@hse.ru

This article reviews the results of an online poll held among 317 teachers of state universities in a number of regions of Russia. The commitment to university and profession is evaluated with a 3-component Meyer and Allen model that singles out: emotional commitment (emotional attachment to the university or profession), normative commitment (perceived liabilities towards the university or profession), commitment based on estimate of costs (subjective estimate of costs associated with potential change of the university or profession). It shows that there are no reasons for a conflict between commitment to the university and commitment to the profession, however different groups of teachers feature different correlation between those sets. What is the most important in differentiating between the commitments is the role of work experience in a different university. Publication activity of teachers is not related to their emotional commitment to the profession or the university, however it is related to cost estimate and the normative commitment to the university and the profession. Based on which the author concludes that Russian teachers are not encouraged with article publications, i. e. with the research activity in general as the attractive part of their job and most likely are forced to do it.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-109-128



Evgeny Terentyev - M.A. in Sociology, Analyst, The Internal Monitoring Center, National Research University—Higher School of Economics. Email: eterentev@hse.ru

Ivan Gruzdev - M.A. in Sociology, Director, The Internal Monitoring Center, National Research University—Higher School of Economics. Email: igruzdev@hse.ru

Elena Gorbunova - M.A. in Sociology, Analyst, The Internal Monitoring Center, National Research University—Higher School of Economics. Email: evgorbunova@hse.ru

Address: 20 Myasnitskaya str., 101000, Moscow, Russian Federation.

A discourse analysis of semi-structured interviews with professors of 9 Russian universities has been conducted. The analysis focused on the narratives about student attrition and its causes and revealed the generally accusing nature of professors’ discourses. All narratives can be integrated and described under the metaphor of a trial. In the most blatant form, the discourse is constructed in a prosecutor style, but attorney- and judge-like speeches also blame students for the high attrition rates. All the three types of discourse build figurative barriers between the university and professors on the one hand and students on the other. These barriers encourage professors to feel uninvolved in student attrition. None of the discourse types phrased the university mission or problematized the principles and goals of university activities. We suggest that the “bad student” discourse reflects some real problems associated with massification of education and with inevitable changes to the student body. Professor discourse analysis makes it possible to assume that response to these changes is restricted to stating the problems and disassociating oneself from them. Construction of figurative barriers may result in professors’ self-distancing not only from students but also from the changes affecting the education system. Such self-distancing complicates the process of adaptation to changes, making it poorly controllable.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-129-151


Ayzhan Omarbekova - M. Sc. in Management Science and Operations Research, Junior Researcher, The Science Department of the Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University.
Address: 53, Kabanbay batyra av., 010000, Astana, the Republic of Kazakhstan. Email: aizhan.omarbekova@nu.edu.kz

Autonomy of educational institutions has been consistently extended in Kazakhstan over the last years: national educational standards have been broken into invariable and variable components, boards of regents have been introduced, per capita financing system is being tested, and autonomous educational organizations have been established, such as Nazarbayev University in higher education and Nazarbayev intellectual schools in secondary education. The paper analyzes legislative instruments, standards and official documents regulating the process of education in the secondary education system to define the extent to which educational institutions enjoy autonomy. Besides, the article uses the data of interviews and focus groups with 46 administrators and 95 teachers of schools, gymnasia and lyceums in different regions of Kazakhstan to analyze how they understand the notion of ‘autonomy of educational institutions’ and how they assess the current degree of autonomy of organizations they work in. The conclusion is that granting more autonomy and independence comes from above but is not requested by schools. Autonomy becomes a challenge for contemporary schools, as more independence implies greater responsibility.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-152-172

Education Statistics and Sociology


Daniil Alexandrov - Candidate of Sciences in Biology, Head, Laboratory of Sociology in Education and Science, National Research University—Higher School of Economics (Saint Petersburg). Email: dalexandrov@hse.ru

Valeria Ivaniushina - Candidate of Sciences in Biology, Leading Research Fellow, Laboratory of Sociology in Education and Science, National Research University—Higher School of Economics (Saint Petersburg). E-mail: ivaniushina@hse.ru

Ekaterina Kazartseva - Candidate of Sciences in Sociology, Junior Researcher, Laboratory of Sociology in Education and Science, National Research University—Higher School of Economics (Saint Petersburg). Email: kazarceva.ekaterina@mail.ru

Address: 16 Soyuza Pechatnikovstr., 190008, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation.

Data on ethnic diversity and ethnicity/migration correlation among primary and secondary school students is presented in the article for the first time ever. The study is based on polls held among 21,320 school students in 365 schools of five regions of Russia (Moscow Oblast, Saint Petersburg, Leningrad Oblast, Tomsk, and Pskov). The most part of students speaking Russian as their second language attend schools of Moscow suburbs area (16%) with the least part attending schools of small towns and settlements of Leningrad Oblast (6.6%) and Pskov (8.5%). The sample covers 56 ethnic groups with some being rather small. In Saint Petersburg, Pskov and Tomsk there are 63–66% locals among children speaking Russian as their first language, whereas in Moscow suburbs area there are 44% only. Among ethnic minorities, the highest numbers of locals are in Tomsk and Pskov (38–39%). In Saint Petersburg there are more locals or second generation migrants among Ukrainians, Belarusians and Tatars, whereas “generation 1.5” migrants prevail in number among Tadzhiks and Uzbeks (46–49%). Generation 1.5 migrants prevail among all ethnic groups in Moscow suburbs area with Uzbeks and Tadzhiks being the most prevailing (62%). In Tomsk, most of the ethnic minorities’ representatives are either locals or second-generation migrants. Statistics on ethnic and migration status of school students allows for assessment not only of the scale of migration flows but also of a retrospective time dynamics for various ethnic groups. Families from Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia were actively moving to Russia 15–20 years ago. Now there is massive migration going on among Tadzhiks, Uzbeks and Kyrgyz who bring their children of various ages. We believe that education management authorities should initiate prudent integration of school students with Russian as their second language irrelevant of their citizenship but with consideration of their families’ migration background.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-173-195


Nail Farkhatdinov - Ph.D., Senior Researcher, Centre for Fundamental Sociology, Institute for Theoretical and Historical Studies in the Humanities, National Research University—Higher School of Economics. Email: nfarkhatdinov@hse.ru

Nadezhda Evstigneeva - Independent Researcher. Email: nadeva@mail.ru

Dmitry Kurakin - Candidate of Sciences in Sociology, Director, Center for Cultural Sociology and Anthropology of Education, Institute of Education, National Research University—Higher School of Economics. Email: dukurakin@hse.ru

Valeriya Malik - Leading Expert, Center for Cultural Sociology and Anthropology of Education, Institute of Education, National Research University—Higher School Of Economics.
Email: vmalik@hse.ru

Address: 20 Myasnitskaya str., 101000, Moscow, Russian Federation.

The article provides results of a sociological study of management patterns applied to secondary schools in modern Russia. Focus groups with school principals were organized in eight pilot regions of Russia in October—November 2014. The project aimed at constructing a typology of management patterns, which we regard as a configuration of relations  associated with teaching process management. Four basic patterns were singled out: “authoritarian manager”, “democratic manager”, “authoritarian leader” and “democratic leader”. They were built together following the merge of two criteria: delegation regimes, i. e. steady patterns of interrelation between principals and other subjects and agents of management, as well as subjectivity of principals, i. e. their ability to independently determine and implement the organization’s mission. Each pattern is described based on the example of FGOS (Federal State Educational Standard) introduction in elementary schools. It is demonstrated that the choice of a specific management pattern is determined by a wide range of factors and is situational, i. e. depends on the goal and context of management activities. Potential of the identified management patterns is discussed in terms of efficient implementation of reforms.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-196-219



Yury Tarasevich - Doctor of Sciences in Mathematical Physics, Professor, Head of Laboratory “Mathematical Modelling and IT in Science and Education”, Astrakhan State University. Email: tarasevich@asu.edu.ru

Taisiya Shinyaeva - Ph.D. student, Junior Researcher, Laboratory “Mathematical Modelling and IT in Science and Education”, Astrakhan State University. Email: tae4ka19@mail.ru

Address: 20a Tatishcheva str., 414056, Astrakhan, Russian Federation.

The article reviews criteria for scientific research performance assessment. It analyzes feasibility of the task to develop scientifically based methods that would allow assessment of activities performed by individual research departments and teams. The authors believe that a full-scale study of the dynamics of scientific departments and teams development should be based on the Current Research Information Systems (CRIS) within companies integrated into the national CRIS. The authors suggest a method to assess performance of the ongoing research studies based on the review of ratings of journals on which a research team’s studies are published.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-221-234

History of Education


Eduard Dneprov (1936–2015) - member of the Russian Academy of Education, honored professor of National Research University—Higher School of Economics. In 1990–1992, the first and only elected Minister of Education of Russia, the initiator and organizer of the 1992 education reform 1992, the author of an education law adopted in the same year.

The topic of this research is legislation in education in pre-revolutionary Russia of the 19th—beginning of the 20th century. Law concept had various interpretations in pre-revolutionary theory of state and law. The only common principle was the fact of its sanctioning by the monarch, the so-called “highest approval” both written and verbal. In other words, no right was to determine the law, but the political will, which formed the right itself, based on the political and social–economical current state of affairs. The main emphasis is placed on distinctive characteristics of lawmaking, namely that the main landmarks of the country’s history were embodied in the legislature, and the fact that the highest Government bodies were involved in the process. The main forms of the Russian Empire’s legislature including the ones in the sphere of education—a Manifest (manifesto decree), Ukaz (decree), povelenie (expression of the will), mnenie (opinion) of the Council of State, polozhenie (position) of the Committee of Ministers, vsepodanneishii (“humble”) report of the Minister, rescript, the law—were primarily set at the beginning of the XIX century, and existed without significant changes up to 1917. Special attention is given to the analysis of the main Government bodies (State Council, the Committee of Ministers or Council of Ministers, State Duma). Materials display the data on the legislature as such, as well as multiple administrative rulings in the sphere of education—main purpose being to reflect the intent, goals, ideology and means of carrying out the reforms, proposed by various legislative acts. The dynamics of how problems of education were reviewed and ruled upon in the main Government bodies are presented, as well as the process of publication and codifying of these legislative acts.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-244-278


Book Reviews and Survey Articles


Igor Chirikov - Candidate of Sciences in Sociology, Senior Researcher, Institute of Education, National Research University—Higher School of Economics; Researcher, Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley, the United States. Address: 20 Myasnitskaya str., 101000, Moscow, Russian Federation. Email: ichirikov@hse.ru

Having worked as the Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University for a long time, Henry Rosovsky summarizes his experience and suggests a “university owner’s manual” to be studied by students, teachers, administrators, and the public. Being mostly a journalistic style and ironic, the book however addresses the fundamental aspects of life in modern universities. The review singles out four principal storylines that are being analyzed through the lens of the current trends and empirical data about Russian higher education. Those are issues of 1) using objective vs. subjective criteria in admission of students; 2) focusing on general vs.specialized education; 3) choosing between teaching-oriented and research-oriented faculty; 4) bringing in professional or academic administrators to run the university. Despite the fact that the book was written over 25 years ago and is devoted to Harvard, Rosovsky’s ideas are still important. His strong belief in the necessity to develop a collective responsibility of students, teachers and administrators for the life and the future of a university is timely for Russian higher education.

DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-289-301