Informatization and education. The development of science in Russian universities as a new priority of the state University science
The significant lag of domestic science from foreign ones, the insufficient effectiveness of university science, the lack of its strategic planning, the problems of Russian graduate school - all these are manifestations of the general crisis of science and education in Russia. This is the opinion of Leonid PERELOMOV, associate professor of Tula State University, candidate of biological sciences.
|
PERELOMOV Leonid Viktorovich - Associate Professor of Tula State University, Candidate of Biological Sciences. |
Leonid Viktorovich, how would you define the state of university science in Russia today? Does it need modernization? What needs to be done first for this?
Science as a complex human activity aimed at obtaining objective knowledge about nature and society, by definition, will always need constant development and updating. Scientific activity includes various components, a number of which - such as the education system and scientific information - are well developed in our country. However, the domestic scientific infrastructure (scientific institutions, experimental and laboratory equipment), and research methods lag significantly behind those in post-industrial and highly industrialized countries. The measures taken by the country's leadership to develop science are clearly insufficient and are often only of an image nature. There is a feeling that decision-makers have a certain misunderstanding of the role of science in a modern state, an underestimation of its potential effectiveness even from the standpoint of forming the country’s authority: for example, the launch of the first artificial satellite went down in the history of mankind forever, but this is what happened at the World Championships football in Sweden in 1958, only specialists remember.
We should not forget that science is one of the spheres of a person’s spiritual life, part of his culture. Therefore, a crisis in science inevitably leads to a crisis in culture. In our country there is a unique unified system of scientific institutions - the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Few countries can afford to have such a government organization, whose main task should be the production of scientific knowledge. In this regard, university science has traditionally occupied a secondary position in our country. However, today the world is changing so quickly that classical, fundamental knowledge is no longer enough to train a good specialist - he must master the full range of modern knowledge in his field. This also puts forward new requirements for university teachers, who are required to freely navigate the latest achievements of science, which is impossible if the university teacher is not engaged in scientific work himself. The involvement of students in research work is of great importance - mastering the methodology of scientific work contributes to the development of logical thinking and forms creative approaches to solving professional problems.
In addition, I would like to quote the words of V.I. Vernadsky, who believed that “strengthening scientific work related to local or national life makes it possible to use the spiritual forces of the people as much as it will never be possible to use them in a unitary centralist organization. The local center uses and calls to life spiritual forces that are otherwise inaccessible to stimulation. In this way, the maximum intensification of scientific work is achieved.” 1 At the moment, only higher educational institutions cover the entire territory of our huge country, and only on their basis is it possible to realize the scientific potential of a wide range of our citizens. Moreover, if we look at the university system of, say, Germany, the most famous and significant universities there are by no means the capital’s universities. All these arguments emphasize the urgent need for the widespread development of university science in Russia.
There is an opinion that receiving grants is not an easy story. You have a lot of experience in this regard. You were the owner of a grant from the President of the Russian Federation to support young candidates of science, and underwent scientific internships in Germany, Italy, and Japan. All this happened not so long ago. There was an element of luck in this, a happy coincidence, or your successes are the result of hard work, perseverance, determination and, of course, the talent to learn. What advice would you give to young scientists and researchers who do not want to leave their country and want to be useful to it?
Grants are a form of competitive funding for science. Please note that the terms “win” and “win the competition” are different from each other. Winning a game always has a significant element of chance and luck. And winning the competition means that you have demonstrated the best compliance with the conditions of this competition. Moreover, these conditions are quite simple: publications, previous grants (the so-called scientific foundation) and your ideas for solving the problem. The presence of a chain of these conditions is the key to the successful completion of your grant application. Therefore, for a novice researcher, the publication of the first article is extremely important in financial support for his work - a scientific supervisor should help with this. As for ideas, here, if you want to become an independent and self-respecting scientist, you need not to borrow ideas, but to generate them yourself. The minimum conditions required for this are your head and the presence of a good library. As a friend of mine says: “Two hours in the library saves two months in the laboratory.”
In addition, in our country there are sometimes, frankly speaking, strange selection criteria - such as the cost of work and the time it takes to complete it.
Of course, the work of the experts evaluating your grant application is not without subjectivity. But this subjectivity should normally manifest itself not in sympathy for your personality, but in interest in your idea and its support. Unfortunately, this is not always observed, especially in our country, especially at the level of provincial universities, but I don’t want to talk about it, since such phenomena have nothing to do with scientific expertise and real science.
Analyzing the practice of receiving domestic and foreign grants, I can say that in my case, of the above factors, success was associated with hard work and determination. You should not expect that every (or even every third) application you make will receive support. The lack of bias in the assessment of my projects is evidenced by the list of various organizations that provided support for research: the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, the German Academic Exchange Service, the Japan-Russia Youth Exchange Center, INTAS, the Volta Center - Landau Scientific Network, the Australian government.
I am happy to share my experience, but I really don’t like giving advice to anyone, so I will answer with quotes. One of them belongs to the poet Yu. Levitansky: “Everyone chooses for himself a woman, a religion, a path. Whether to serve the devil or the prophet - everyone chooses for himself.” Another quote from K. Ushinsky: “If you successfully choose work and put your soul into it, then happiness will find you on its own.”
As for stimulating the influx of young people into science, in my opinion, this can provide the opportunity for their self-realization in this area and a decent salary.
Do you agree that studying in Russian graduate school is fraught with problems? Why are the criteria by which graduate graduates in Russia are determined not valued in America and Europe? What is the main difference between Russian and foreign (European) scientists?
We should not talk about differences between scientists, but about differences in the organization and financial support of scientific research. In terms of these indicators, we differ sharply not only from Europe, but also from the countries of Latin America.
Of course, studying in Russian graduate school is associated with a number of problems, but I would not single them out separately - all these are manifestations of the general crisis of science and education in the country. Please note that in Europe and America, the evaluation criteria for our graduate students are not quoted, but the graduate students themselves are, for the most part, gladly accepted. This once again confirms that we need to unify the criteria for assessing the effectiveness of scientific activity with post-industrial countries if we ourselves want to follow the path of development.
The system of training postgraduate students (precisely postgraduate students, since few of them get to the point of defending a dissertation) in Russian universities is often distorted, from the purposes of admission to graduate school to the defense. Sometimes the real purpose of admission to graduate school is not work on a scientific problem, but, say, the additional teaching load of a teacher. That is, in this case we are not talking about science, but, in fact, about the social security of the scientific director. With decent salaries for university staff, such incidents would disappear on their own. Some managers, who still have non-material motivation, take on graduate students to obtain another academic title or to satisfy their own vanity.
As I understand, today there are no clear requirements for the publication of a dissertation candidate by the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation: I have seen abstracts where the lists of published works included only abstracts of regional conferences and monographs of university publishing houses on free topics. The abstracts themselves were similar to reviews from the Internet, in which it was impossible to make out what was done by the dissertation author and what was borrowed from literary sources. Therefore, the supervisor must be responsible for the final result of the graduate student’s preparation - the defense of a high-quality dissertation.
This is not to say that work is not being done to improve the quality of dissertation papers - the number of dissertation councils has been radically reduced, abstracts must be posted on the website, etc. Just the other day, information was received that the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation is tightening the rules for opening postgraduate courses in universities. Despite this, reforming Russian postgraduate education will obviously require a long time.
How do you evaluate the criteria of the all-Russian system for assessing the effectiveness of higher education institutions in the research field from the Indicative List of June 19, 2012. Are they related to the topic of scientific development?
In my opinion, the Approximate list of criteria for assessing research activities is proposed correctly. I understand that it will not be easy for regional universities to adapt to such an assessment system. But this is the only way to become part of the modern world. The criteria, in fact, set the goals for the development of science in universities. The next logical step should be a comprehensive government program to ensure the achievement of these goals.
I am glad that the list does not include the “number of monographs” criterion, since publications of this kind, often not seriously reviewed, can be published in unlimited quantities with proper financial support.
Patent activity is assessed by the volume of funds from the management of intellectual property, which is also very rational.
- How would you define the relationship between university science and RAS organizations? How to avoid conflicts of interest?
At the moment, it seems to me that conflict relations have developed more between areas of research than between the Russian Academy of Sciences and universities, which is a normal situation. The Russian Foundation for Basic Research, Russian Humanitarian Foundation and other respected foundations finance projects regardless of the departmental affiliation of their authors. The situation could radically change if the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, within the framework of its federal targeted programs, finances projects exclusively in universities, and the size of grants from “supra-departmental” funds does not radically increase.
It seems that it would be in the public interest to reserve the exclusive right for the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation to finance infrastructure scientific projects for universities, and to finance initiative scientific projects through national scientific foundations, making their work more transparent.
For the development of university science, it would be very useful to recall and continue the Federal Target Program for the integration of university science and the Russian Academy of Sciences. At our university (Tula State University - Ed.), especially at the Faculty of Natural Sciences, this kind of cooperation has been quite productive and continues to this day.
- What is your attitude to the third wave megagrant competition?
I support holding a mega-grant competition as an opportunity to create growth points for domestic science. It is and only through megagrants that modern analytical equipment can be purchased. For example, the only EXAFS station (External X-ray Absorption Fine Structure - extended fine structure of X-ray absorption spectra) in our country operates at the synchrotron in Novosibirsk, despite the presence of powerful theoretical schools on this method in other cities.
The megagrant is one of the real opportunities to expand the geography of this method. I will share my experience of participating in the megagrant competition.
Together with Antonio Violante, a professor at the Friedrich II University of Naples, we took part in two previous competitions with a project to create a laboratory for the biogeochemistry of microelements at Tula State University. The conclusion that can be drawn based on our experience is poor-quality scientific examination of projects. On our last application there were four expert opinions - two foreign and two Russian. Two foreign and one domestic experts made a number of comments on the project, but generally approved it. The second Russian expert categorically stated that our project did not meet the objectives of the competition, namely the absence of plans to create a research laboratory in the application. It was obvious that he either did not read the application at all, or was guided by some of his own considerations. I hope that the organization of the third wave of megagrants, as well as the examination of projects, will be held at a higher level. A prerequisite for this may be the participation of the scientific community in the formation of an expert council on megagrants. Thus, the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation appealed to the Society of Scientific Workers with a request to nominate their candidacies for the expert council. The society nominated 10 specialists, 5 of them were approved by the ministry (one subsequently refused).
How do you feel about the idea of reorganizing universities in the country, reducing state universities by 20 percent, and branches by 30. Will this benefit university science or will it lead to new problems?
I have a very negative attitude towards the reduction of universities, primarily because universities in many regions are cultural edifiers. It seems to me that it would be more effective to go through the reform of existing universities - to optimize their management structure (including by appointing rectors directly from the ministry), to introduce areas of training that meet the needs of the time, to create a minimum scientific infrastructure with the possibility of its further development at the expense of scientific funds .
- Vernadsky V.I. “Tasks of science in connection with state policy in Russia” // “Biosphere and Noosphere”, M.: Iris-Press, 2002.
The involvement of scientific research in the educational process is a necessary condition for: maintaining the required professional level of teachers, improving the qualifications of future specialists, the natural transition of ideas from fundamental laboratories to the innovative environment - through some university graduates, increasing the cultural level. A significant advantage of university science is attracting young people to scientific research in the most organic way.
The current state of science in universities Why is there almost no scientific research in most universities? Because universities have almost no need for science at the moment: the administration - because of the low commercial benefits, as well as because of the independence of active scientists; students - due to the lack of a clear connection between educational and research work and the possibility of obtaining a more attractive job in the future, as well as due to the optionality of such research; teachers for the most part are not interested in science due to the lack of a normative connection between scientific research and their position, as well as higher income from educational activities.
PROBLEMS OF HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE Lack of funding Catastrophic aging of the instrument base Fatal gap between generations Declining level of specialists Unpopularity of scientific work among young people Imperfection of the administrative system A slanted view of leaders on priorities The current state of science in universities
Ideally, all teachers should be engaged in science and all researchers should participate in the educational process. In practice, it is enough for some teachers (professors) to create their own scientific groups and actively conduct scientific research. The rest (associate professors) will focus on teaching. It is necessary to institutionalize the existing de facto division of teachers into two groups with different requirements for each of them. It is necessary to strengthen and formalize the requirements for teaching researchers.
At the current stage, it is necessary to highlight and actively support those teachers who are already conducting research at a good level, attracting undergraduate and graduate students - points of growth!!! As indicators for evaluation, you can take the number of articles in peer-reviewed journals (number of patents) + the ability to attract funds (grants and/or business contracts). An incentive is needed for other teachers to engage in scientific activities.
The optimal and flexible way is the development of grants. the structure of science in universities involves solving small scientific problems by small teams in a short time, which is optimal when distributing funding from scientific foundations; well-thought-out competitions will easily and painlessly highlight active scientists in the university environment - points of growth; the development of grants for universities will attract scientists from academic institutions to the educational sphere; financial independence of active scientists will improve the administrative system in universities; extending the grant system to postgraduate studies will significantly increase its efficiency and attractiveness. See also. Real competitions are the best tool for increasing the efficiency of Russian science.
It is necessary to ensure the modernization of the instrument base of universities. I admit that universities need to allocate funds for these needs at a faster pace than the RAS. The creation of centers for collective use and the development of cooperation between the Center for Use and Universities on a contractual basis seems to be effective.
Youth policy Three tasks - - to involve young people in scientific research; - retain the most active in science; - provide conditions for career growth. When the reform is over (let’s say 5 years), science and higher education will have to rely on those who are now 25–35 years old. Right now we need to develop a variety of mechanisms for attracting young people: UIRS, trips to conferences, numerous grants and scholarships, etc.
Strengthening postgraduate education. The structure of graduate school and its funding must be reoriented towards supervisors. It is the scientific supervisors, based on the degree of their scientific importance, who should have targeted grants for the training of graduate students, as well as for the remuneration of postdocs. It is necessary to streamline teaching in graduate school.
Innovative activity Universities are too large and clumsy entities to carry out innovative developments. Technology parks can be organized on the basis of the university, where scientists, if desired, can implement their ideas by organizing separate enterprises. Universities should not claim intellectual property on the research results obtained by scientists in the course of basic research. The very involvement of a significant part of young people in scientific research will be a good environment for the emergence of ideas.
NEW FORMS AND NEW PROBLEMS OF ORGANIZING SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES
Dezhina Irina Gennadievna
Doctor of Economics, Head of the Sector of Economics, Science and Innovation, Institute of World Economy and International Relations RAS
Moscow, Russia e-mail: [email protected]
The development of science in Russian universities as a new priority of the state
The article analyzes the current state and place of science in Russian universities, as well as the main government measures aimed at integrating science and education and supporting science in universities. It is shown that recent government initiatives to form a network of elite universities are not accompanied by the creation of incentives for institutional changes that would contribute to the development of scientific work in them.
Key words: science, integration of education and science, research universities, scientific and educational centers, state science policy.
Supporting science in Russian universities is becoming a new government priority. The draft “Strategy for Innovative Development of the Russian Federation for the Period until 2020” states that research universities “should become the core of a new integrated scientific and educational complex, ensuring... the implementation of a significant share of fundamental and applied research” (Strategies..., 2010). It is planned to develop a whole range of measures aimed specifically at supporting and gradually concentrating scientific research in universities (strengthening the personnel component of university science, updating equipment, participation of universities in technological platforms, in the creation of small enterprises, supporting their cooperation with enterprises, etc.).
It should be noted that science in Russian universities has never been their competitive advantage. Despite a number of efforts made by the state,
the structure of the country's scientific complex has changed little and universities remain an insignificant segment in terms of funding and personnel potential. Today, university science is not yet competitive in many respects compared to academic science, especially if we evaluate the effectiveness of scientific research by the number and quality of publications (their citation rate), and the prestige of journals published by academic research organizations and universities. For example, of the 112 Russian publications with the highest impact factor that are included in the Web of Science database, 95 are published by institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and only 2 by universities (Poisk, 2010).
In 2009-2010, the government developed and began implementing a number of ambitious projects aimed at increasing the role of Russian universities not only in the country, but also in the world. An important component of the measures being implemented is support for science and integration processes related to science.
Universities in the country's scientific complex
In recent years, a group of leading universities has been formed in the country, where the development of scientific research has become one of the key objectives included in their strategies and plans. But even the country’s strongest universities are still characterized by an internal separation of education and science, which is overcome with great difficulty, as well as weak integration with academic and other organizations of the country’s scientific complex.
University researchers have a different labor and professional legal status than teaching staff. The basic pay of university teachers is several times higher than that of scientists in research departments; there are no centralized payments for academic degrees for employees of scientific departments. At the same time, the lecture load standards for teachers are significantly higher than those of their colleagues abroad. All this makes university research departments an unattractive place to work, on the one hand, and on the other hand, it reduces incentives for teachers to engage in scientific work.
An additional problem hindering the development of science in universities is related to part-time work. In post-Soviet times, most university teachers began to combine work at several universities, as well as provide private educational services, so there was even less time left for individual work with undergraduate and graduate students and doing science. According to a study conducted by the National Research University Higher School of Economics, at least 40% of university teachers work part-time, but for only less than 5% of them this work is related to conducting any kind of scientific research. At the same time, 12.2% teach in other state educational institutions, and almost 40% are engaged in tutoring, private educational services, preparation for entering universities, etc.1
For the university, the main reporting items to the state remain the plan for admitting students to the first year and the hourly workload of professors and teachers.
1 Data for 2008 Source: Tensile test. Excerpts from the report of the rector of the National Research University Higher School of Economics Y. Kuzminov “Academic community in Russia - breaking an effective contract” // Search. 2010. November 19 (No. 47). P. 6.
corps in accordance with the curriculum of specialties and specializations. Thus, even from a regulatory point of view, science is not the main activity of universities. As a result, less than half of universities conduct at least some kind of scientific work, without discussing issues of its volume and quality. Only about 19% of university faculty are engaged in scientific research - a figure that has increased by only 2% over the past five years and remains dismally low.
Integration of science and education: government approaches and successful practices
The integration of science and education was declared as one of the strategic objectives of the state at the very beginning of the 1990s. In practice, it began to be supported by the government in 1996, when a package of documents was developed on the organization and financing of the Presidential Target Program “State Support for the Integration of Higher Education and Basic Science for 1997-2000” (“Integration”)2. Its main component was the creation of educational and scientific centers (ETCs) on the basis of universities or academic research organizations. At the same time, integration was primarily understood as a partnership between academic research organizations and universities, and not as the “cultivation” and strengthening of intra-university science.
In Soviet science, there were various forms of interaction between research institutes and universities, many of which developed spontaneously. In some cases, stable traditions of cooperation have historically been formed, which were not destroyed even in the difficult post-Soviet period. As a result, the “Integration” program primarily received support from those who already had experience in cooperation.
Meanwhile, small funds were allocated for integration activities, so development within the Program went along the lines of assigning functions that already existed initially to research institutes and universities. Thanks to integration, the training of specialists in universities has improved, and academic institutions have the opportunity to select the best young researchers to work in their laboratories. Nevertheless, the strengthening of science in universities did not happen, and academic scientists no longer began to teach. The structure of the organization and financing of science remained virtually unchanged - thus, the overwhelming volume of fundamental research continued to be carried out in academic institutes. This situation continues to this day (Fig. 1).
The Integration program had every chance to evolve and become an initiative to highlight and support research universities. There were every reason for this, and even draft regulations were developed for the creation of research universities. Instead, the Program was curtailed, and its activities were redistributed among other federal target programs. Ultimately, this led to the fact that the implementation of centralized measures to strengthen university science was postponed for almost 10 years.
2 Later, the program received federal target status and became known as “Integration of Science and Higher Education in Russia.”
Picture 1
Basic research in Russian universities and academic institutes (as a percentage of the total funding for basic research in the country)
Sources: Russian Science in Figures - 2009. Statistical collection. M.: CISN, 2009. P. 91; Science of Russia in numbers - 2010. Statistical collection. M.: CISN, 2010 (in print), tab. 4.22.
Almost simultaneously with the Integration Program - in 1998 - the implementation of another, quite successful, initiative began with the goal of strengthening the natural and technical sciences in universities - the Fundamental Research and Higher Education (BRHE) Program. The idea was that through the rapprochement of science and education in Russia, it is possible not only to strengthen science and create conditions for obtaining modern education, but also to solve a number of problems, including continuity and attracting young people to science. The Program was based on the model of creating “growth points” in Russian universities with a modern research base, where young specialists are trained at the highest level. The development of external relations with Russian and foreign organizations and universities was also considered relevant, and therefore became one of the key components of the Program.
The BRHE program is a joint initiative of the Russian Ministry of Education and Science and the American Civil Research and Development Foundation (CRDF). For the first five years, funding was provided on a parity basis: 50% was allocated by the Russian side (including 25% from federal funds, and 25% from local, including regional, sources) and 50% from the American side through CRDF, thanks to grants allocated by the John Foundation D. and Catherine T. MacArthur and the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Later the American share dropped to 30%.
Within the framework of the Program, 20 scientific and educational centers (REC) were created. At the first stage of the Program’s development, each REC received guaranteed (“basic”) funding of about $1.5 million for 5 years, which was a significant amount for the late 1990s - early 2000s. Stable long-term funding made it possible to purchase scientific equipment and develop educational programs based on modern research. On average, about 60% of the total grant was spent by the centers on the purchase of equipment, 20% on salaries, and 10% on supporting young scientists and graduate students.
The next step in the development of the Program was the transition from “basic” to project financing: centers began to compete with each other for resources that were allocated in a targeted manner for the implementation of large scientific and educational projects. Unfortunately, project funding lasted only three years, and currently support for RECs is provided mainly from Russian sources, but not in a targeted manner, but through the participation of centers in programs and events of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
RECs are an example of “successful practice” of integration: scientific cooperation of scientists from academic organizations and universities has become equal, about 10% of REC staff are scientists from RAS institutes. At the same time, the number of publications in international publications increased by an average of 30%. The development of scientific research, in turn, entailed the updating and revision of lecture courses and practical exercises. Every year, each of the centers made adjustments to student training programs. At the same time, the number of updated programs ranged from 3-4 to 20. Finally, significantly more young people participating in the REC remained in science: about 60% of the Centers’ employees are scientists under the age of 35. At the same time, 37% of those who defended their dissertations there remained to work in science - a proportion significantly higher than the national average.
An important indicator of the success of the Program can be considered the fact that universities have revised their approaches to planning their work and strategic management. This helped them formulate long-term development programs and therefore successfully participate in subsequent competitions held by the Ministry of Education and Science - innovative educational programs of universities, research universities, grants for the creation of laboratories under the guidance of leading scientists of the world. It was easier for universities participating in the BRHE program to formulate programs for scientific and innovative development, since using the REC model they had already worked out approaches and schemes for organizing science, education, external relations and their management.
Unfortunately, the REC model developed within the framework of the BRHE Program has not found wide application in Russian practice - those research and educational centers that later began to be created in universities with state support have a different content, which is due to the much more modest scale of their funding and other principles of distribution of funds.
Recently, a new impetus for integration processes has arisen not as a result of targeted government actions, but as a by-product of completely different actions - namely, support for the material base of research in universities, which the government is consistently implementing.
As a result, the balance of the composition and quality of scientific equipment in the country’s scientific complex has changed - whereas previously all the best and unique equipment was located
was carried out mainly in the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences, then as a result of updating the instrument base of universities, a number of unique installations appeared in them. At the same time, since the conditions for conducting scientific research in universities have practically not changed, it turned out that the only way to effectively use the equipment is joint scientific work of academic and departmental scientific organizations and universities. At the same time, such cooperation became beneficial to both parties - researchers at academic research institutes received access to new equipment, and universities received the opportunity to participate in promising, modern work, training undergraduate and graduate students in modern research methods. As a consequence, this has led to an increase in high-quality publications prepared jointly by employees of scientific organizations and universities, including with the participation of undergraduate and graduate students.
The results of an inventory of almost 400 objects of unique scientific equipment, carried out in 2009-2010 by IMEMO RAS3, make it possible to quantify some of the processes outlined above. It turned out that today, on average, academic research organizations have older installations than universities. Since 2007, 26% of new installations have been commissioned in academic institutions, and 37% in universities. In leading universities, unique equipment is mainly located in scientific institutes at universities that have a relatively autonomous status (this situation is typical, for example, for Moscow State University, St. Petersburg State University, Tomsk Polytechnic University, Southern Federal University).
However, the equipment utilization rate is higher in academic research organizations, which is explained by more intensive scientific work in academic institutes compared to universities. In academic institutions, 40% of the equipment located there is loaded at 91-100% of normal. In universities, only 15% of all unique installations are operated with such intensity. 20% of the unique equipment located in academic research organizations and 31% of the equipment located in universities are loaded by half or less (in relation to the passport regime). The participation of academic institutions in conducting research at universities contributes to more efficient use of scientific equipment in universities.
Formation of an elite group of research universities
In 2009, support for university science became one of the important directions of state policy. It began to be implemented through giving special statuses (titles) to selected universities. As a result, a network of 29 national research universities was created, Moscow and St. Petersburg State Universities (MSU and St. Petersburg State University) received the special status of “unique scientific and educational complexes”4, 7 federal universities were also formed,
3 More detailed results of the study are presented in the book: Dezhina I. Innovative development of Russia in the light of the “triple helix” theory // Global transformation of innovative systems / resp. ed. N. I. Ivanova. M.: IMEMO RAS, 2010. pp. 86-87.
4 About Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov and St. Petersburg State University: Feder. Russian law Federation of November 10, 2009 No. 259-FZ // Ross. gas. 2009. 13 Nov. (No. 5038).
in which the development of science is declared one of the priorities. It is expected that at least two more federal universities will be created - in Kaliningrad and in the North Caucasus region.
In a latent form, the selection of the best, “elite” universities began back in 2006, when the government initiated an innovative educational program (IEP) within the framework of the national project “Education”. Based on the results of the competition, 57 universities were selected, which received significant budget funding for two years. The purpose of the support is to improve the quality of educational and scientific activities through the purchase of new equipment, advanced training of personnel, and the preparation of new educational materials and manuals. This was the first large-scale experience of training universities in project management, selection of development priorities, as well as new forms of reporting based on a set of quantitative indicators. The IEP can be considered as the first step in the policy of giving status to universities - universities that won the competition began to be considered the strongest in the country.
At the same time, in 2006, two federal universities were formed - the Siberian Federal and the Southern Federal (SFU and SFU). They were created by combining several diversified universities - thus becoming the largest in the country. Federal universities have a regional focus: according to official documents, such universities are created to increase the competitiveness of leading sectors of the economy in their respective regions. Granting “federal” status is accompanied by additional budget funding, which can be spent on certain (but not all) types of activities. Federal universities, along with solving the problems outlined in the IEP, must pay significant attention to the development of science and its integration with education, in particular by inviting foreign teachers and researchers, increasing the number and proportion of students and graduate students from abroad and other activities.
The decision to create federal universities can be considered as a purely political one, made at the highest government level without broad coordination and discussion. This was once again confirmed in 2009, when the President of the Russian Federation D. A. Medvedev signed a decree on the creation in Russia of five federal universities5, also selected on a regional basis, but according to criteria unknown to the public. Moreover, as follows from numerous discussions, the transformation of a number of universities into federal universities was unexpected even for their employees.
A slightly different picture is typical for research universities, the third initiative that began in pilot mode at the end of 2008. Then two universities (MISiS and MEPhI) were given the status of national research universities out of competition. In 2009-2010, 27 more universities were added to them, which received this status on a competitive basis.
Research universities will be supported from budget funds for 5 years, and the rules drawn up and approved by them will be fully implemented.
5 On the creation of federal universities in the Northwestern, Volga, Ural and Far Eastern federal districts: Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of October 21, 2009 No. 1172 // Published in "RG" - Federal issue No. 5026 of October 23, 2009.
They must complete the development program by 2018. Each university formulated its own development program, and it was adjusted and approved in a new form after the status was assigned (this is also typical for federal universities). As two years of experience in implementing this initiative shows, a single document that would answer the question of why it was necessary to form a network of national research universities has not appeared. At the same time, the programs put together do not fit together: for example, the number of representatives of the scientific diaspora, whom, according to their development programs, all research universities together are going to attract to cooperation, significantly exceeds the number of Russian scientists abroad (Fedyukin, Frumkin , 2010: 29).
Research universities are allocated additional budget funding on the basis of 20 percent co-financing (as in the IEP) and permission to spend funds under five headings to implement their stated development programs. The types of activities permitted for financing include: acquisition of educational and scientific equipment, advanced training of teachers and researchers at universities, development of educational programs, development of information resources, as well as improvement of the quality management system for education and scientific research6. At the same time, the mechanism for allocating funds is constantly being adjusted, which complicates the work of universities: for example, in 2009, funds were allocated to them on the basis of subsidies, in 2010 the principles of financing were changed - an attempt was made to centrally order (through departments) equipment and services for universities, and by the end year, the financing scheme was again revised. In addition, and this is even more significant, if we bear in mind the task of supporting science in universities, budget funds allocated to research universities cannot be spent on financing scientific research, supporting scientific departments and groups, as well as graduate students. Finally, the basic conditions governing the activities of Russian research universities remain the same as for other universities. Therefore, the integration of science and education within universities is still complicated. A similar situation is typical for federal universities. As a result, ambitious goals are set, but achieving them is extremely problematic.
The policy implemented by the Russian government to assign a number of universities the category of “national research” is based on the concept of strengthening existing universities through temporary additional budget injections, rather than the gradual development of research universities. This approach has a right to exist, but if we strive to achieve the parameters characteristic of research universities around the world, then in addition to funding, a number of conditions regulating the work of universities must be created and adjusted. These include such as ensuring the possibility of attracting foreign teachers and students, the formation of endowments,
6 On the competitive selection of university development programs for which the category “national research university” is established: Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation. Federation dated July 13, 2009 No. 550; Regulations on the competitive selection of university development programs for which the category “national research university” is established. ИКБ: http://mon.gov.ru/dok/prav/obr/5556
construction of campuses and a number of others. However, another approach is also possible, which may turn out to be more effective - the state takes upon itself to create favorable conditions for the work of any universities, including for the development of science in them. And then, on a competitive basis, they will apply for budget funding for scientific projects and, depending on their potential, whether or not to receive this additional funding. At the same time, in the end, an “elite” group will definitely appear in the general mass of universities, which will be a natural result of development in conditions of competition and equal opportunities.
Strengthening university science and its integration with the educational process is of great importance for the development of all components of the innovation system. For Russia, taking into account the system of division of functions that has developed in the country’s scientific complex, this is a particularly urgent task. The government has taken various steps to solve this problem: from attempts to integrate various organizations (primarily academic) with universities to assigning universities various statuses, which are supported by additional budget funding, including those aimed at strengthening the material base of the scientific and educational process. Meanwhile, there are no incentives for institutional changes in universities that would contribute to the development of science. It is important to change the system of conducting educational activities, radically reviewing the norms and requirements for the work of teaching staff in order to create real opportunities and incentives to engage in scientific research, make the system of financing university science more flexible, and eliminate internal and external regulatory barriers between education and science. In addition, the “successful practices” that exist in Russia indicate that all of them (it is not clear what we are talking about - about “successful practices”) are built on the cooperation of universities, academic and other scientific organizations, taking into account the traditional connections, rather than pitting them against each other.
Literature
Strategies for innovative development of the Russian Federation for the period until 2020. Project. Version dated December 31, 2010, p. 64. URL: http://www.economy.gov.ru/minec/activity/sections/innovations/doc20101231_016
Kuzminov Ya. Academic community in Russia - the rupture of an effective contract // Search. 2010. November 19 (No. 47). P. 6.
Dezhina I. Innovative development of Russia in the light of the “triple helix” theory // Global transformation of innovative systems / resp. ed. N. I. Ivanova. M.: IMEMO RAS, 2010. pp. 86-87.
Fedyukin I., Frumin I. Russian flagship universities // Pro et Contra. 2010. No. 3 (May-June). P. 29.
Development of Research in Russian Higher Education Institutes as a New Government Priority
Irina G. Dezhina
PhD in Economics, Head of Department of Economics Science and Innovations Institute of Economics and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
e-mail: [email protected]
In the article the analysis of the modern status and place of science in Russian higher educational institutes is presented, as well as key government measures aimed at integration of research and education in universities. It is demonstrated that government initiatives to create a group of elite universities are not accompanied by introduction of additional stimulus that would encourage the development of science in these universities.
Keywords: Science, integration of education and research, research universities, research-educational centers, government science policy.
Alexander M. Gabovich
Leading Research Associate of the Crystal Physics Department at the Institute of Physics of NASU, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Kyiv, Ukraine e-mail: [email protected]
Vladimir I. Kuznetsov
Principal Research Associate of the Department of Logic and Methodology of Science at the Institute of Philosophy of NASU,
Professor of the National University ‘Kyiv-Mohyla Academy’ and Kyiv University of Law, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Kyiv, Ukraine
e-mail: [email protected]
Is the personal-member institution of the Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences justified in the light of scientometric indicators?
For whom untosoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
Existence of state-supported academies of science is a distinctive feature of the fundamental-science organization in Ukraine. Their research staff is divided into two groups: (i) personal members (academicians and corresponding members) and the rest of the researchers. First-group members have numerous economic and status privileges. It is officially purported that personal members are more
1. On the problem of creating scientific foundations for the design of parts made of various alloys and parts of ship power plants. Leading scientists in this field are doctors of technical sciences, professors Valentin Borisovich Firsov and Anatoly Antonovich Getman.2. Energy saving and increasing environmental safety when using hydrocarbon fuels in ship internal combustion engines - Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Viktor Ivanovich Sychikov.
3. New principles of combating the impact of weapons and military technologies and dual-use internal and surface sea waves on objects - Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Yuri Vasilyevich Pylnev.
4. Mathematical modeling of hydrodynamic processes and dynamics of marine technical objects and systems - Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Yuri Vladimirovich Guryev.
5. Information support for the functioning of ship power plants - Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Vyacheslav Nikolaevich Temnov.
6. System analysis, management and processing of information on the physical fields of marine underwater objects - Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, Captain 1st Rank Evgeniy Ivanovich Yakushenko.
Training of scientific and pedagogical personnel
The training of scientific, pedagogical and scientific personnel at the institute is carried out through doctoral studies, postgraduate studies, by seeking the academic degrees of candidate and doctor of sciences, as well as in targeted postgraduate studies in other universities of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.Two dissertation councils at the institute allow for the training of scientific, pedagogical and scientific personnel in seven scientific specialties for awarding scientific degrees of doctor and candidate of science.
Now, implementing the behest of the world-famous scientist A.N. Krylov, at the institute, as before, scientific research is given paramount attention. High scientific potential is represented by the teaching staff, which includes 48 doctors of science, 57 professors, 183 candidates of science, 149 associate professors and senior researchers, 45 academicians and corresponding members of industry Academies of Sciences, more than 12 honored workers of science and technology, 9 honored workers higher school, 4 honored inventors and innovators of the Russian Federation, 12 honorary workers of higher professional education. More than 80% of military teachers graduated from military academies, many of them have extensive experience serving on surface ships, submarines and naval units.
Rationalization and inventive work
The main activity of inventive and rationalization work is concentrated in faculties, departments, laboratories and other structural divisions of the institute. Non-staff invention commissioners have been appointed to organize and carry out inventive and rationalization work.An effective form in organizing and activating technical creativity are thematic months for collecting and implementing rationalization proposals. Every year, in April and November, the institute holds months, during which up to 95% of rationalization proposals are developed and implemented. The results are summed up at meetings of the invention commissions.
Every year the institute organizes an exhibition of scientific and technical creativity as part of the institute’s scientific conference.
The Naval Engineering Institute was repeatedly awarded with diplomas from the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation "For the successes achieved in the All-Army Review for the best organization of inventive, rationalization and patent-licensing work" and was noted among the best according to the results of the annual All-Army Review for the best organization of inventive, rationalization and patent-licensing work work. Nine employees of the institute were awarded the badge "Honorary Innovator of the Leningrad Military District."
Military scientific work of students and cadets
The military-scientific work of cadets at the institute is organized in close connection with the educational process, research, rationalization and inventive activities.Currently, 526 cadets are taking part in military scientific work, conducting research work in 38 military scientific circles. On average, up to 70% of cadets of 2-5 years participate in military scientific work.
Institute cadets actively take part in interuniversity scientific competitions for the best scientific work. In September 2009, the institute’s team took third place and was awarded a certificate for active participation and the will to win in the All-Army Research Competition.
Participation in conferences, exhibitions and competitions
For a broad discussion of scientific achievements, the institute annually plans, organizes and holds scientific conferences with the involvement of specialists from various regions and regions of Russia. Four Interuniversity scientific conferences, two scientific conferences, two Regional scientific conferences, a Seminar of the Coordination Scientific Council, and an All-Russian seminar were held at the institute. The Institute's achievements in scientific activities are advertised and promoted at exhibitions at various levels.Over the past five years, the institute's staff took an active part in fourteen International scientific conferences, twelve All-Russian scientific conferences, four Regional scientific conferences and seminars in various fields.
Every year the institute participates in the Moscow International Salon of Industrial Property "Archimedes". For active participation in the Salon, the Naval Engineering Institute was repeatedly awarded certificates from the head of the invention department of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. In April 2009, the XII International Salon of Industrial Property "Archimedes-2009" was held in Moscow. For active participation in the organization and conduct of the Salon, the Naval Engineering Institute was awarded a “Diploma of Respect and Gratitude.” By the decision of the International Jury, the Naval Engineering Institute was awarded a “Gold Medal” and four “Silver Medals”. In the category "100 Best Inventions of Russia" the institute was awarded a diploma from the Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks of Patent Holders. From 2004-2009, 55 articles by the institute's staff were published in the materials of scientific and practical conferences "Innovative activities in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation."
Editorial and publishing work
The Institute has a printing house that produces textbooks, monographs, educational and teaching aids. During 2004-2009, 12 monographs, 21 textbooks, 450 educational and teaching aids were published.Scholarship support for young scientists
In 2009, three teachers of the institute were awarded grants from the V. Potanin Charitable Foundation to Captain 1st Rank V.I. Krasikov, captain 3rd rank N.N. Senny, captain 3rd rank E.Yu. Andreeva.For high results in research activities, adjunct of the institute, captain-lieutenant V.S. Gulin was awarded a scholarship from the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation.
Loading...