HIGHER ENGINEERING EDUCATION IN RUSSIA:

1
HIGHER ENGINEERING EDUCATION IN RUSSIA
Incentives for Real Change Maria Dobryakova,
Martin Carnoy, Isak Froumin University Higher
School of Economics (Moscow), Stanford
University School of Education September 28-30,
2009

2
Why should engineering universities change?

• Examples from other countries
• US moving from a country to a global level,
  while redefining their engineering competencies
  set up standards
• EU preserve individual countries identities,
  while harmonizing their (engineering) education
  systems
• Based on Lucena J. et al. Competencies beyond
  countries The re-organization of engineering
  education in the United States, Europe, and
  Latin America, Journal of Engineering
  Education, 2008

3
Recent context for Russian engineering
universities

• Related to changes in the economy and labor
  market
• decline of the parent/customer industries
• emerging needs of high-tech universities
• greater labor mobility
• Related to financing of education
• systemic underfinancing of higher education and
  research in universities
• deterioration of technical facilities
• since about 2006, the government has started to
  award grants to the best universities on a
  competitive basis (uni development programs)
• Regulatory and institutional changes
• introduction of / transition to 42
• national unified examination
• more flexible regulation of curriculum policies
• Societal
• transformation of socio-economic structure
• demographic decrease of prospective students

4
Geography, methods, data

• 4 cities Moscow (8 universities), St. Petersburg
  (3),
• Tomsk (4), Kazan (4)
• Research methods and data (obtained so far)
• semi-structured interviews with university
  administration (75 interviews)
• student surveys (1400 respondents)
• graduate surveys (511 respondents)
• semi-structured interviews with employers (32
  interviews)

5
Universities reaction to challenges a typology
Institutional development
stabilization standardization
institutionalization
Beyond the trend
most flexible, self-sufficient, ? ahead of the
states signals
Wann?bes
the strongest, most influential in terms of
pattern-building attentive to formalization of
practices ? most sensitive to the states signals
(formal)
Planned economy
stick to the past, proud of their roots, watch
and wait choose changes when have to
Defense industry
Tradition
Innovation
Their strong points as seen by the interviewees
6
Demands that shape university stakeholders

• The State
• demand for compliance with regulations
  (including accreditation)
• demand for professionals

• Business, industry
• demand for manpower
• demand for knowledge and innovations

UNIVERSITY

• Prospective and current students, families
• demand for fashionable specializations
• demand for a degree (diploma)

7
Types of universities by their attitude and
reaction to the recent challenges
8
Voices and attitudes a cross-examination

• UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATION convinced they are
  doing what they can
• ENGINEERING EDUCATION PROFESSIONAL COMMUNITY
  passive, disintegrated imitation of activity

9
Voices and attitudes a cross-examination

• STUDENTS 30 doubt that they are well
  educated, would have chosen the same major, or
  can be globally mobile.
• But! 35-55 are disinterested in additional
  learning opportunities provided by their
  university

10
Voices and attitudes a cross-examination

• GRADUATES most are satisfied (up to 90) lack
  practical skills and a foreign language
  proficiency find jobs easily

11
Voices and attitudes a cross-examination

• EMPLOYERS no particular enthusiasm, no
  particular complaints against BA
• the STATE no clear signals to engineering
  education?
• Except for slogans

12
Types of universities shares
stabilization standardization
institutionalization
Institutional development
Beyond the trend
Wannabes
Tradition
Innovation
13
?????
Thank you!
13