Vladimir Knyaginin,
Director of the Strategic projects centre “The North-West”,
St. Petersburg
– What is “classical university” and how does this model look like in Russia? And how is it related to the European tradition of the 19th-20th centuries?
– Notwithstanding considerable transformations, the notion of classical university as a multidisciplinary educational institution, hasn’t changed much. It is an educational space, which, on the one hand, embodies many, almost all sciences, and, on the other hand, it gives universal education with fundamental elements being of much importance.
University tradition does not have a long history in Russia, as foundation of universities took place in the 19th century. It was mostly influenced by Europe, especially Germany and France. Nowadays system of departments, grades and the professor’s status were all borrowed. Though, we have our own peculiarities as well.
Berlin University or Humboldt University was founded in 1808. The new university organization was based on two principles – academic freedom and the unity of research and teaching (a university professor was to be a scientist foremost, and only then a lecturer). Humboldtian model made German universities centers of scientific life and led to German science dominance in the world for almost a century (1831 - 1933)
First post-graduate students and first professors were either invited from abroad, or returned after studying in European universities. It is believed that our universities mostly resemble German Humboldtian system of classical universities. It differs them from, let’s say, non-classical schools in France or liberal Anglo-Saxon universities with their predominance of colleges and wide choice of optional courses.
– What is happening now? How do you assess the state policy in modernizing of higher education?
– Recently the system of Higher education in Russia has changed significantly. It has happened because the business element of education has grown, studying has become more oriented towards practical knowledge and skills, labor-market is changing dynamically and the share of continuous, uninterrupted education is increasing. To meet the market economy requirements, many new subjects were introduced in Russian universities, the institution of commercial education has started to develop. Moreover, many new universities appeared, both humanitarian or social and technical.
In general, Russia is undergoing the same changes in higher education system as all other continental Europe. This process started about 10-15 years ago, when the European society critically evaluated higher education level. To create a common European higher education space in order to assist citizens’ mobility, on the one hand, and to reach the level of prestigious American and British universities, on the other, the so-called Bologna process was launched. Russia joined it in 2003. The reform included fundamental changes – introduction of two level education system (i.e. bachelor - master); implementation of credit and module education process system; opening wide range of possibilities for teachers, lecturers and students academic mobility.
Talking about international tendencies, there are several trends today that influence contemporary higher education and are most likely to come to Russia as well.
First of all, Higher educational institutions are being differentiated according to their value for the market. There are first class universities, so called global players, they dominate the educational services market; they have the highest ratings; they attract best students and teachers, and they are able to form the most high-capacity research teams. All the rest are experiencing the deficit of personnel and funds. In some countries, such as the USA, the difference between the most prestigious and peripheral institutes can be critically big.
Secondly, the international market of teaching staff is being created. All specialists, like the universities, are divided into mobile, well-paid professors/ lecturers and researches and all others. At the same time, universities are fighting for the best personnel. And they do not only pay attention to the applicants’ level, but also try to attract well-known people, Nobel award winners, etc.
Finally, universities managing system is also changing. Management becomes more independent and more valuable part of a higher education institute. Moreover, there are already well-paid technical staff, that take the best positions in the market.
These tendencies mean that in our country world-class universities cannot appear without their taking part in the international competition for the world-class academics and managers. At present, however, according to international ratings, there are no Russian higher education institutions among the leaders of the world educational services market or there are only a few.
– Is it possible to talk about the new key role of local universities in the regions development?
– It depends on the university status. I have already mentioned the growing difference between institutes. For example, the role of 50 leading American universities in the region in the national economy is really significant – their research budget can reach up to several hundred million dollars a year, and they get milliards of dollars in the form of endowments and donations. In this sense, they are large economic and social players, but not all are like these ones.
In Russia, if we look at the regions, the situation is not that simple. There are universities that play an important role in their region development and in the regional economic life as well. There are universities that have insignificant influence even in towns.
Any university directly or indirectly influences on its region development. It happens directly when a university is in the center of this or that industrial regional cluster, enterprises get their staff educated there. In case of enterprise universities, they are the place to launch new high-tech and innovative businesses. Moreover, many universities have the highest number of workers in the town and a lot of, though specific, premises. It is an important factor that has influence on the town in general.
There is also indirect influence. As many international researches of consulting firms, such as McKinsey and Boston Consulting Group, show, in choosing place for big companies or innovative technologies, its being close to a university is important, even crucial. If there is a university, high level of both higher and secondary education of the population, it attracts capital investments into the region, and facilitates the development. The logic is simple. If there is a low level of education or small annual number of graduates in the town, then there is a limited number of specialists. Moreover, high-tech companies will have to place their research and product development orders far-far away. It will make prompt, efficient link with university departments impossible.
Shchedrovsky P.G. notices that in the last 15-20 years several production technologies, knowledge distribution and usage have been developing. Education as a sector of knowledge production and handling is losing its institutional position. Funds that were formerly given to education are divided nowadays between education, mass media, consulting, educational tourism, trainings, and other institutes that fulfill this mission. If contemporary educational institutions do not find the answer to these new ways of knowledge distribution, do not modernize according too new requirements, than the most part of the educational services market will be covered by other products and other institutions. As a matter of fact, existing mass media technologies are generally more effective and cheaper than education.
Contemporary universities try to play an important role in the life of the society. European universities are a good example to this. They try to compete with think tanks and to get out of academic ‘ebony towers’. They tend not to loose society’s orders on researches. Every year universities conduct more and more socially important studies, and try to make them publicly known and to get responses. And they also promote their results. Furthermore, they become main places for communication. It is universities that organize forums, public discussions, sometimes cultural events and so on. University campus also becomes open to the needs not only of the university, but of the town as well.
– What is the difference between national universities that are being established and the already existing ones? And what are the principles to choose territories for them?
– I’ll try to answer according to what I know, though, technically this question should be addressed to the Ministry of Education and Science. In the educational sphere it is profitable for the state to concentrate resources to several important areas that is national universities. Thus, they can work on the modern education models in practice and organize leading research centers on their basis.
There is necessity in the country for the system of new national universities to be launched. It is planned to open them on the basis of the already existing so-called ‘memorial’ most prestigious Russian higher education institutions that already have a high status due to their previous achievements, and in some cases on the basis of newly-established institutions. At the moment two federal universities are under development: Siberian in Krasnoyarsk and Southern in Rostov-on-Don. Two are under discussion – in Moscow and St. Petersburg. There is a possibility to open a university in the Urals, usually Chelyabinsk is mentioned in this connection, and in the Far East, presumably in Vladivostok. The choice of the regions can be easily explained: they are key ones in the country, contemporary higher education is one of the ways to go from raw materials to innovative, technologically advance industries. I would even say more definitely, without professional education reforms it can hardly be achieved.
Altogether, location of a national university depends on a number of conditions, yet most important ones are the following: a) proximity to places with high density of educational services consumers; b) accessibility of international markets; c) availability of highly-organized urban environment, attractive for living in a particular city; d) presence of a wide network of corporate clients/partners; e) availability of initiators for creation of a national university, a pool of investors (a substantial number of funding sources); a partnership with regional and municipal authorities (in other words, national universities should carry out a function of regional development).
Selection of a particular location for such a significant player also depends on a subjective factor, particularly, on active participation of local authorities and academia.
At the moment, about one year has passed since the moment of initial creation of national universities. Certainly, for institutions of several dozens of thousands people it is not a significant amount of time. However, it is obvious that some results have already been achieved both in the southern part of Russia and in Siberia. First of all, there is no more fear that creation of such a large new structure would worsen the situation. It did not get worse, but improved teaching staff conditions, internal and external financing. Moreover, new status made universities change their educational programmes and even more importantly, to improve situation with research. Newly established institutional structures are persuaded to take a more active position on the research component; because if there is no success on this matter, there will not be a substantial chance for them to count on any support.
– What are the ways to overcome closed-loop nature of a contemporary university and include it into the actual regional process?
– Actually, it is one of challenges to a contemporary university. When a university is academically self-isolated and strives for freedom of choice in terms of research topics with budget funding usually readily available, there are no incentives for getting out from the academic autonomy, thus, there is no freedom for the university. However, everything is changing. Currently, those universities which are not restructuring, most likely are going to lose in competition for money, highly qualified staff and talented youth to their more flexible rivals. Hence, the only way to solve this problem is internal restructuring. As for the internal incentives for university’s development, in my view, they are obvious at the moment: there is a public order for scientific research, labor-market provides with demand for professionals and territories want universities to take more active part in the social life.
Èíòåðâüþ ïîäãîòîâèëà Þëèÿ Íåðóø
Ïåðåâîä Îëüãè Îñèíîâñêîé
