VO 2 2019 EN

National Research University Higher School of Economics
Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow

No 2, 2019
established in 2004, is an academic journal published quarterly by
the Higher School of Economics (HSE)
ISSN 1814-9545 (Print)
ISSN 2412-4354 (Online)
The mission of the journal is to provide a medium for professional discus-

sion on a wide range of educational issues. The journal publishes original
research and perceptive essays from Russian and foreign experts on edu-
cation, development and policy. “Educational Studies Moscow” strives for
a multidisciplinary approach, covering traditional pedagogy as well as the
sociology, economics and philosophy of education.
Conceptually, the journal consists of several parts:
• Theoretical materials and empirical research aimed at developing new
approaches to understanding the functioning and development of edu-
cation in modern society
• Papers on current projects, practical developments and policy debates
in the field of education, written for professionals and the wider public
• Statistical data and case studies published as “information for reflection”
with minimal accompanying text
• Information about and analysis of the latest pedagogical projects
• Reviews of articles published in international journals
Target audience: Leading Russian universities, government bodies responsi-
ble for education, councils from federal and regional legislatures, institutions
engaged in education research, public organizations and foundations with
an interest in education.
All papers submitted for publication in the “Educational Studies Moscow” journal
undergo peer review.
Distributed by subscription and direct order
Subscription Index:
“Rospechat” Agency—82950
“Pressa Rossii” Agency—15163
Address
20 Myasnitskaya St., Moscow, Russia 101000
Tel: +7 (495) 772 95 90 *22 037, *22 038
E-mail: edu.journal@hse.ru
Homepage: http://vo.hse.ru/en/
Educational Studies Moscow
Yaroslav Kuzminov
Editor-in-Chief, Rector, HSE, Russian Federation
Editorial Council
Mark Agranovich, Federal Institute of Education Development, Russian
Federation
Alexander Asmolov, Moscow University, Russian Federation
Michael Barber, Pearson Affordable Learning Fund, Great Britain
David Berliner, Arizona State University, United States
Vladimir Briller, Pratt Institute, United States
Martin Carnoy, Stanford University, United States
John Douglass, University of California in Berkely, United States
Vladimir Filippov, Ministry of Education and Science of Russia
Sergey Filonovich, Graduate School of Management, HSE, Russian Federation
Alma Harris, University of Malaya, Malaysia
Josh Hawley, Ohio State University, United States
Manuel Heitor, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal
Steve Kerr, University of Washington in Seattle, United States
David Konstantinovsky, Institute of Sociology RAS, Russian Federation
Vitaly Kurennoy, HSE, Russian Federation
Oleg Lebedev, Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences, Russian
Federation
Prashant Loyalka, Stanford University, United States
Lev Lubimov, HSE, Russian Federation
Simon Marginson, Institute of Education, University of London, Great Britain
Igor Remorenko, Moscow City Teachers’ Training University, Russian
Federation
Alexey Semenov, Moscow State Pedagogical University, Russian Federation
Jussi Välimaa, University of Jyväskylä, Finland
Pavel Zgaga, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Editorial Board
Isak Froumin, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, HSE, Russian Federation
Elena Penskaya, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, HSE, Russian Federation
Irina Abankina, HSE, Russian Federation
Viktor Bolotov, The Eurasian Association on Educational, Russian Federation
Andrey Podolsky, MSU, Russian Federation
Alexander Sidorkin, College of Education, CSU Sacramento, USA
Alla Tryapicina, Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia
Maria Yudkevich, HSE, Russian Federation
Editorial Staff
Executive Editor Y. Belavina
Literary Editor T. Gudkova
Proof Reader E. Andreeva
Pre-Press S. Zinoviev
http://vo.hse.ru/en/
Table of contents
No 2, 2019
THEORETICAL AND APPLIED RESEARCH
Hans de Wit
Evolving Concepts, Trends, and Challenges in the Interna-
tionalization of Higher Education in the World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Mikhail Sokolov
Transformative and Selective Systems: A Study in Compara-
tive Sociology of Academic Markets Careers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Maria Novikova, Arthur Rean
Influence of School Climate on Bullying Prevalence: Russian
and International Research Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Elena Varshavskaya, Elena Kotyrlo
Graduates in Engineering and Economics:
Between Demand and Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Pavel Zhdanov, Irina Trostyanskaya, Andrey Barsukov,
Nadezhda Polikhina
The Modern Rector: Competencies Required in the Global
Academic Marketplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .129
PRACTICE
Aleksander Veraksa, Margarita Gavrilova,

Daria Bukhalenkova
Association between the Quality of Teacher-Child Interac-
tion and Language Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Mikhail Vandyshev
To Include or Not to Include? Immigrant Children Education
as Perceived by the Teaching Community in Sverdlovsk
Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Olga Boytsova, Dmitry Nosov, Valeriya Torop
The Justice of Inequality, or Who Wins the Social Theory
Olympiad and How . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
E D U C AT I O N S TAT I S T I C S A N D S O C I O L O G Y
Lyubov Dukhanina, Aleksandr Maksimenko

Enlightenment Demands of Russians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
Kseniya Pavlenko, Katerina Polivanova,
Alexandra Bochaver, Elizaveta Sivak
Extracurricular Activities of School Students: Functions,
Parental Strategies, and Expected Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
H I S TO R Y O F E D U C AT I O N
Lidia Okolskaya
Liberal and Conservative Trends in Post-Soviet Social Poli-
cies for Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
BOOK REVIEWS AND SURVEY ARTICLES
Kseniya Belik
Raising a Professor, or How Higher School Teachers Were
Trained in the Russian Empire
Review of the book: Ivanov A. Uchenoe dostoinstvo Rossi-
yskoy imperii. XVIII —nachalo XX veka. Podgotovka
i nauchnaya attestatsiya professorov i prepodavateley vyss-
hey shkoly [Scientific Dignity in the Russian Empire. 18th to
Early 20th Century. Training and Qualifying Professors and
Higher School Teachers]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
Evolving Concepts, Trends,
and Challenges in the
Internationalization of Higher
Educationin the World
Hans de Wit
Received in Hans de Wit tion that are impacted by and impact this
October 2018 PhD, Director of the Center for Inter- phenomenon? How do we understand
national Higher Education (CIHE) and its evolution as a concept? What nation-
Professor of the Practice at the Lynch al policies are developed to enhance the
School of Education at Boston Col- international competitiveness of higher
lege. Address: 140 Commonwealth Ave, education? What are the implications for
Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts 02467. institutional strategies for international-
E-mail: dewitj@bc.edu ization? It concludes with some lessons
and recommendations for Russian high-
Abstract. Internationalization as a con- er education to learn from these trends
cept and strategic agenda is a relatively and issues concerning internationaliza-
new but broad and varied phenomenon, tion in higher education.
driven by a dynamic combination of po- Keywords: internationalization, histori-
litical, economic, socio-cultural and aca- cal dimensions, international higher ed-
demic rationales and stakeholders. This ucation, internationalization concepts,
article addresses the following points: national policies, institutional strategies,
What are the historical dimensions of Russian higher education
internationalization? What are the key
factors in international higher educa- DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-8-34
Internationalization as a concept and strategic agenda is a relatively

new but broad and varied phenomenon, driven by a dynamic combi-
nation of political, economic, socio-cultural and academic rationales
and stakeholders. Its impact on regions, countries and institutions var-
ies according to their particular contexts. This implies that there is no
single model for internationalization that fits all. What are the histori-
cal dimensions of internationalization? What are the key factors in in-
ternational higher education that are impacted by and impact this phe-
nomenon? How do we understand its evolution as a concept? What
national policies are developed to enhance the international compet-
itiveness of higher education? What are the implications for institu-
tional strategies for internationalization? And what lessons can Rus-
sian higher education learn from these trends and issues concerning
internationalization in higher education?
1. Historical One can argue that higher education by its nature always has been
Dimensions of international. Altbach [1998] refers to the university as an institution
Internationa- that is global by nature and history. Kerr (1994) states that universi-
lization1 ties are essentially international, but at the same time acknowledges
that “they have been living, increasingly, in a world of nation-states
that have designs on them.” (p. 6).
As de Wit and Merkx [2012: 43] (see also [de Wit 2002: 3–18]) re-
mark though, references to the global nature of universities ignore the
fact that universities mostly originated in the 18th and 19th century and
had a clearly national orientation. Neave [1997] and Scott [1998] also
refer to the myth of the international university.
The international orientation of universities has changed dramat-
ically over the centuries and takes substantially different and more
complex forms and approaches today. What now is called ‘interna-
tionalization of higher education’ as a concept and strategy is a re-
cent phenomenon that has emerged over the last 30 years. Its roots
reach back over centuries, while it has been interrupted by more na-
tional orientations.
1.1. Medieval Many publications on the internationalization of higher education refer

Roots back to the Middle Ages and the Renaissance period, when, in addi-
tion to religious pilgrims, university students and professors were a fa-
miliar sight on the roads of Europe [de Ridder-Symoens 1992]. While
limited and scattered in comparison to the European Higher Educa-
tion Area we know today, we can still speak of a medieval ‘European
space’ defined by a common religion, and a shared language (Lat-
in) and set of academic practices [Neave 1997: 6). The resemblance
may only be superficial, but we can still see similarities to the promo-
tion of mobility and the broadening of experience, common qualifica-
tion structures and the gradual growth of English as the common ac-
ademic language today [de Wit 2002: 6].
1.2. National Most universities originated in the 18th and 19th centuries with a dis-
Models tinct national orientation and function. In many cases, there was a pro-
cess of de-Europeanisation. Mobility was rarely encouraged or even
prohibited, and Latin as the universal language of instruction gave
way to national languages. The transition was gradual. Hamerstein
[1996: 624] mentions the gradual prohibition of study abroad in many
countries; the displacement of Latin by vernacular languages; and the
replacement of the academic pilgrims by the ‘grand tour’ which fo-
cused more on the cultural than on the academic experience. As de
Wit [2002: 7] observes, universities became institutions that served
the professional needs and ideological demands of the new nations in
Europe. Scott [1998] observes that “paradoxically perhaps, before it
1 This section builds on [de Wit et al. 2015; Hunter, de Wit 2016].
Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

Hans de Wit
Evolving Concepts, Trends, and Challenges in the Internationalization of Higher Education
became an international institution the university had first to become a

national institution — just as internationalization presupposes the ex-
istence of nation states.” (p. 123)
In this more national period of higher education, international pro-
jects were not completely absent. As de Wit [2002: 7] observes, three
international aspects can be identified: export of higher education
systems, dissemination of research, and individual mobility of stu-
dents and scholars. (See [de Wit 2002: 7–10; de Wit, Merkx 2012:
44–47].)
1.3. Impact of Two Political events in the first half of the 20th century led to a focus on
World Wars stimulating peace and mutual understanding through international co-
operation and exchange. The creation of the Institute of Internation-
al Education (IIE) in the United states in 1919, the Deutscher Akade-
mischer Austauschdienst (DAAD) in Germany in 1925, and the British
Council in the UK in 1934 are illustrations of this development. In the
aftermath of World War I, it was strongly driven by rationales as peace
and mutual understanding, with the United States taking a more lead-
ing role than before, mainly as a result of an increased immigration of
scholars from Europe [de Wit, Merkx 2012: 47].
This trend continued after 1945 and the end of the Second World
War through the Fulbright Program, given that Europe was still re-
covering from the devastation of war and concentrating its efforts on
reconstruction. Goodwin and Nacht [1991] refer to this shift by ob-
serving that “views of the world in U.S. higher education were trans-
formed almost overnight by World War II. From a cultural colony the
nation was changed at least in its own eyes, into the metropolis: from
the periphery it moved triumphantly to the center” (p. 4–5). Cunning-
ham [1991] describes a similar shift for Canada. Rationales as nation-
al security and foreign policy became the real forces driving the de-
velopment of international education after World War II, even though
sometimes still using the rationales of peace and mutual understand-
ing from before World War II, for instance in the Fulbright program of
1946 [de Wit, Merkx 2012]. De Wit [2002] describes similar trends for
the Soviet Union. The Cold War became the principal rationale for an
international dimension of higher education, which moved from inci-
dental and individual activities into organized international education
programs, driven more by national governments than by universities
[Hunter, de Wit 2016: 51].
While the two big superpowers became active in international ed-
ucation for reasons of national security and foreign policy, the rest of
Europe played a more marginal role.
1.4. The European The European Community strengthened as an economic and politi-
Model cal power between 1950 and 1970, but it was not until the second half
of the 1980’s that European programs for education and research
emerged. Its flagship program ‘Erasmus’ itself grew out of smaller
initiatives that had been introduced in Germany and Sweden in the

1970’s and a European pilot program from the early 1980’s, and was
later grouped together with similar initiatives in the 90’s under the um-
brella program Socrates, evolving more recently into Erasmus+, an
even broader program embracing education, sports and youth pro-
grams [de Wit 2002].
As Hunter and de Wit [2016] state, Erasmus and other programs
were not based on any educational rationales and roles of the Europe-
an Community until the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992, but rather, they
had their foundation in the need for more competitiveness in relation
to the United States and Japan, and in the desire to nurture a sense of
European citizenship. The program activities have always been based
primarily on cooperation through student and staff exchanges, joint
curriculum development and joint research projects and the enthusi-
astic institutional response to these programs set a clear path for the
European approach to internationalization.
Erasmus has had an even greater impact on the international-
ization and reform of higher education than the mere exchange of
students and teachers. It piloted the European Credit Transfer Sys-
tem (ECTS) and initiated access to EU membership for countries in
Central and Eastern Europe and other aspiring candidates. It paved
the way for the Bologna Process and the realization of the European
Higher Education Area (EHEA), which in turn has generated the Eu-
ropean Commission’s first comprehensive internationalization strat-
egy: European Higher Education in the World (2013) [Hunter, de Wit,
2016].
Within Europe, the United Kingdom was the exception to that
rule. In 1980, the Thatcher Government introduced full-cost fees
for international students, which meant that the main focus of Brit-
ish universities became international student recruitment for income
generation, the end of humanitarianism in international education.
Similar models followed in other English-speaking countries, in par-
ticular Australia. Universities may like to consider themselves essen-
tially international institutions, but they act within national regulatory
frameworks, and the shift in the English-speaking countries com-
pared to continental Europe, that stayed for another 25 years more
in a co-operative model of international education, is a manifesta-
tion of this.
The United States, in absolute numbers an active player but as
percentage of overall student enrolments less, saw a rather unrelat-
ed series of international policies and activities, mainly at the institu-
tional level, and as far as the federal level concerned more driven by
national security and foreign policy: study abroad, international stu-
dents, area studies.

Hans de Wit
2. Global Trends Besides the historical evolution of the international dimensions as de-
in Higher scribed above, internationalization must also be seen in the context
Education of the changing role and position of higher education in the world, as
Affecting internationalization can only be seen in its broader context. The main
Internationalization misconception about internationalization is that we consider interna-
Policies2 tionalization too much as a goal in itself instead of as a means to an
end. Internationalization is not more and less than a way to enhance
the quality of education and research and their service to society.
Higher Education has experienced dramatic expansion in the past
half-century. Massification has changed the reality of postsecondary
education everywhere. At the same time, the global knowledge econ-
omy has made higher education and research a key player and the in-
ternational dimensions of universities more important than ever. What
are the major trends in higher education worldwide: massification on
the one hand, and the global knowledge economy on the other hand,
and how they relate to internationalization. We also focus on autono-
my and academic freedom, and the role of reputation, rankings and
excellence, and the changing political climate as factors influencing
the internationalization in higher education.
2.1. Massification During the last five decades, the higher education landscape has
changed dramatically. Once the privilege of an elite social class, gross
enrollment ratios (GRE) in postsecondary education have mush-
roomed to more than 50% in many countries. There are more than
200 million students studying globally at an untold number of institu-
tions focusing on every specialization possible. In much of the world,
massification is a key phenomenon. Emerging economies, including
China, India, and Latin America (with gross enrollment ratios of 37%,
22% and 35 %, respectively), are expanding their enrollment rates to-
ward 50% or more as is common in the developed world. Even coun-
tries in Africa, still at the elite phase of less than 15% of GRE, the
demand for higher education as a result of improved primary and sec-
ondary education and an emerging middle-class, is rapidly expand-
ing. On the other side, one can observe a saturation in demand in
countries which already have moved far beyond the 50% GRE char-
acteristic of universal enrollment, such as the United States, the Unit-
ed Kingdom, continental Europe, Canada, Australia, South Korea and
Japan. In those places, for demographic and other reasons, the sup-
ply of tertiary places in particular in STEM fields is starting to become
higher than demand.
The relationship between massification and internationalization
is manifest. International students and scholars are needed to fill the
demand for graduates in these fields. Such students are mainly com-
ing from the developing and emerging economies, where there is still
2 This section builds on [Altbach et al. 2017; de Wit, Altbach 2018].
an ongoing demand for quality higher education, resulting in brain

drain and related decrease in research and top talent capacity in these
countries. In the current anti-immigration climate, tensions increase
between the need for imported high skilled talents and the desire to
reduce the influx of immigrants.
2.2. The Global The other key element in higher education development and in in-
Knowledge ternationalization in the past half-century has been the impact of the
Economy global knowledge economy—the increasingly technology and sci-
ence based globalized set of economic relations that requires high
levels of knowledge, skills, and sophisticated international relations.
Research-intensive universities play a particularly important part in
the global knowledge economy. Not only do they educate top talent
but they are also the main producers of basic research in most coun-
tries. Research universities are among the main internationally-linked
institutions. They have strong links with similar institutions around the
globe, host international faculty and students, and increasingly func-
tion in the global language of science and scholarship—English.
2.3. Autonomy The idea of university autonomy has a strong basis in the development
and Academic of the university as we know it. It is strongly embedded in the rise of
Freedom the research-oriented Humboldtian university in the early 19th century,
in Latin American higher education after the Cordoba reform of 1918,
and in the further evolution of universities around the world. Autono-
my and academic freedom are at the very core of the mission of the
university. It is an essential basis for quality higher education, teach-
ing and research [Altbach 2016]. Academic freedom has a long and
controversial history, including confrontations with or threats from
the Catholic Church, Nazi-Germany, Cold War politics, and dictator-
ships in developing countries. The current political climate will lead to
even more attacks on academic freedom, as is manifested in coun-
tries like Turkey, The Philippines, Thailand, China and many others.
This will hinder the development of quality higher education and re-
search, but also international cooperation and exchange. “More at-
tention needs to be given to the mission and values of the university,
for without academic freedom, universities cannot achieve their po-
tential or fully contribute to the emerging knowledge-based society”
[Altbach 2016: 239].
2.4. Reputation National, regional and global university rankings are driving the agen-
and Rankings das of institutional leaders and national governments more than ever.
Many governments, in particular in the North but increasingly also in
the South, create excellence programs and investment schemes to
become more globally competitive, have world-class universities and
move higher in the rankings. While on the one hand there is a call for
more access and equity, governments and institutions of higher edu-

Hans de Wit
cation are striving for more excellence in research and teaching and
learning.
Salmi [2009] summarizes what separates elite research univer-
sities from the rest as a high concentration of talents; abundant re-
sources; and favorable and autonomous governance. Excellence in-
itiatives in for instance Germany, France, Japan, Russia, China, and
other countries have strengthened national system differentiation by
separating a new elite sector of world-class universities from other
more nationally and regionally-oriented research universities.
Rankings—national, regional, global, institutional, by discipline
and across an increasing number of other dimensions—have come
to play an ever more important role in higher education. Global rank-
ing has remade global higher education in three ways, according to
Marginson [2017]. First, competition, the idea of higher education as
a competitive market of universities and countries. Second, hierarchy,
as a core element of the system of valuation. Third, performance, a
performance economy driving “an often frenetic culture of continu-
ous improvement in each institution.” Yudkevich, Altbach, and Rumb-
ley [2016] speak of the “Global Academic Rankings Game,” in which
only a small portion of the higher education sector competes. This mi-
nority of institutions gets all the attention and forces governments and
institutions to “compete” without acknowledging the need for differ-
entiation. As Altbach and Hazelkorn [2017] state: “Prestige and repu-
tation have become dominant drivers rather than pursuance of quality
and student achievement, intensifying social stratification and reputa-
tional differentiation.” (p. 10)
The relationship between excellence initiatives, rankings and in-
ternationalization is clear. They reflect the global competitive nature of
higher education of the elite research universities, they stimulate com-
petition for international students and scholars, and they are driven by
quantitative international indicators: number of international students,
number of international staff, and number of international co-authors
of publications. It drives national governments and institutions to in-
vest in more global research, to use English as language of research
and education, and to focus on international recruitment strategies.
2.5. Changing The emphasis in internationalization has traditionally been on ex-

Economic and change and co-operation and there continues to be a rhetoric around
Political Climate the need to understand different cultures and their languages. Nev-
ertheless, a gradual but increasingly visible shift has been apparent
since the second half of the 1990’s towards a more competitive in-
ternationalization. Van der Wende [2001] calls this a shift in paradigm
from cooperation to competition. De Wit et al. [2017: 232] speak of
the globalization of internationalization, and the choice for higher ed-
ucation in the emerging and developing world between a more com-
petitive direction of internationalization or a more socially responsi-
ble approach.
But a counter-reaction is emerging. The rise of nationalist-popu-

list movements and governments, immigration bans, attacks on aca-
demic freedom, anti-globalism and in Europe anti-integration (Brexit),
all might have negative implications for internationalization.
Manifestations of this trend are Brexit in the UK, the Trump Ad-
ministration in the US, but also more nationalist inward looking move-
ments in continental Europe, in Russia, China, Turkey, the Philippines,
Israel, to mention some main ones [Altbach, de Wit 2016; 2017]. It is
too early to tell what the exact and direct implications of this develop-
ment will be, but it will most likely have a changing and accelerating
effect on mobility patterns in higher education, on autonomy and ac-
ademic freedom, on the privatization and commercialization in higher
education, as well as other key dimensions of global higher education.
3. Implications The massification of higher education and the increasing importance

for Internatio- of higher education and research for the global knowledge economy,
nalization result in an increasing importance of its internationalization. There
are now close to five million students studying abroad, double the
amount of ten years ago, and predictions are a further increase to at
least 8 million in the next decade. There is increasing global competi-
tion for international students taking place. The classic divide between
those countries which are sending (mainly the emerging and develop-
ing countries) and those who are receiving (mainly the developed and
in particular English speaking countries plus Germany and France), is
shifting, and the current political climate will accelerate that process
in the years to come. The international student industry has become
a more global and competitive market.
There is also increasing competition for academic staff. The pres-
ence of international faculty within higher education institutions and
systems around the world is an important dimension of higher edu-
cation in the global knowledge economy. Yet the scope and nature of
international mobility of faculty is a rather unknown and understudied
phenomenon; there is a lack of consensus with respect to what de-
fines as an ‘international’ academic; and there are different profiles
for the institutions recruiting them: from the elite research universi-
ties recruiting the most sought-after academics on the one side of the
spectrum to institutions or systems facing local shortages of faculty
and recruit regional and international faculty to meet basic operation-
al needs [Yudkevic, Altbach, Rumbley 2017].
There is growing demand and recognition for ‘internationaliza-
tion at home’, including internationalization of the curriculum, teach-
ing and learning, learning outcomes and global citizenship develop-
ment. The reality is that only a very small percentage of scholars and
students have the opportunity or even the desire to go abroad for a full
degree or short term, ranging from 1-5% in most countries in the world
to 20-30% in countries like Germany and The Netherlands. And this

Hans de Wit
implies that one has to internationalize at home, to be able to equip

all students for the knowledge society we live in.
The internationalization of research is another dimension of this
phenomenon. Like the case of international faculty, the internation-
alization of graduate education and research, including international
co-authorship and other international research benchmarks, is receiv-
ing far less attention, other than through international rankings. Re-
search, however, becomes a more complex enterprise and requires
more international collaboration and competition than ever. Top ac-
ademic talent is a scarce commodity and processes around issues
such as patents and knowledge transfer require more support than in
the past. Long-term planning for research infrastructure, increased
research capacity, development of new research platforms and better
co-ordination between research units, all require a more strategic fo-
cus on capacity development and international research policies and
systems. The growth in international research funding, patents, publi-
cations and citations requires the development of research teams of a
global nature. Bibliometric analysis yields evidence of increasing sci-
entific collaboration with the international scientific community. Talent-
ed doctoral students and scholars are the international human capital
on which research and development and innovation build. The domi-
nance of English as the lingua franca in research is pervasive and has
also expanded to teaching and learning. This, together with the in-
creasing attention to international rankings and the role of research in
them, explains why in recent years more attention is given to the de-
velopment of national and institutional strategies for the internation-
alization of research.
Other elements of internationalization are international branding,
reputation and rankings. The agenda of internationalization increas-
ingly is driven by the rankings and the quantitative international indica-
tors they rely on: number of international students, number of interna-
tional faculty and number of internationally co-authored publications.
These indicators ignore the relevance of internationalization at home
and of teaching and learning.
According to de Wit, Hunter, Egon-Polak and Howard [2015], in-
ternationalization needs to evolve into a more comprehensive, more
intentional, and less elitist (for all students and staff) process, less fo-
cused on mobility and less economically driven, with the goal to en-
hance the quality of education and research and make a meaningful
contribution to society.
4. Internationaliza- Although, as described above higher education has always had in-
tion, an Evolving ternational dimensions, internationalization as a concept and strate-
Concept gic factor is a rather young phenomenon, resulting from the fact that
higher education at the system and institutional level needed to react
to and act in a more global knowledge society and economy.
A gradual move of internationalization from margin to core has tak-

en place from the 1980s onwards as a consequence of such devel-
opments as the increasing importance of research and education for
economic development (the knowledge economy and society), the
rapidly growing demand for higher education in the world, the end of
the Cold War, and regional cooperation in higher education, the later
particularly in Europe.
In the 1980s and 1990s, the main focus was on mobility. This came
as a result of the unmet demand for higher education, which result-
ed in a drastic increase in international degree mobility of students,
mainly from the developing world to the developed world; the growth
of short term credit mobility of students, in particular in Europe as a
result of Erasmus; an increase in short term faculty mobility, primari-
ly for research; and a gradual growth in franchise operations, branch
campuses and other forms of transnational education.
4.1. Abroad and This focus on what Jane Knight [2012] refers to as ‘Internationaliza-
at Home tion Abroad’, is still prevalent. But by the turn of the century, there also
emerged a need for higher education institutions to respond to a com-
pelling call for globally competent citizens and professionals. This im-
perative requires paying attention to the far larger group of non-mo-
bile students and faculty, and to internationalization of the curriculum
and teaching and learning. As such, the notions of ‘Internationaliza-
tion at Home’ and ‘Internationalization of the Curriculum’ came to the
fore. The first one is defined as:
“Internationalization at Home is the purposeful integration of inter-

national and intercultural dimensions into the formal and informal
curriculum for all students within domestic learning environments”
[Beelen, Jones, 2015].
The second one as:
“Internationalization of the curriculum is the process of incorporat-

ing international, intercultural and global dimensions into the con-
tent of the curriculum as well as the learning outcomes, assess-
ment tasks, teaching methods and support services of a program
of study” [Leask 2015].
But more and more they are considered to be quite similar in content
and focus.
Over the past decade, the relationship between these two compo-
nents—internationalization at home and abroad—and the need to cre-
ate a more central, integrated and systemic approach to internation-
alization, in order to eliminate fragmentation and marginalization, has
spurred an interest in ‘Comprehensive Internationalization’:

Hans de Wit
“A Commitment and Action to Infuse International, Global and Com-

parative Content and Perspective throughout the Teaching, Re-
search and Service Missions of Higher Education. It shapes Insti-
tutional Ethos and Values and touches the Entire Higher Education
Enterprise. It not only impacts all of Campus Life, but the Institu-
tion’s External Frameworks of Reference, Partnerships and Rela-
tionships” [Hudzik 2015].
4.2. Global Trends in In general terms one can say that internationalization over the past 30
Internationalization years has seen the following key characteristics:
• More focused on internationalization abroad than on internation-

alization at home
• More ad hoc, fragmented and marginal than strategic, compre-
hensive and central in policies
• More in the interest of a small, elite subset of students and faculty
than focused on global and intercultural outcomes for all
• Directed by a constantly shifting range of political, economic, so-
cial/cultural, and educational rationales, with increasing focus on
economic motivations
• Increasingly driven by national, regional, and global rankings
• Little alignment between the international dimensions of the three
core functions of higher education: education, research, and ser-
vice to society
• Primarily a strategic choice and focus of institutions of higher ed-
ucation, and less a priority of national governments
• Less important in emerging and developing economies, and more
of a particular strategic concern among developed economies.
In the past decade, however, one can observe a reaction to these

trends. While mobility is still the most dominant factor in internation-
alization policies worldwide, there is increasing attention being paid to
internationalization of the curriculum at home. There is also a strong-
er call for comprehensive internationalization, which addresses all as-
pects of education in an integrated way. Although economic ration-
ales and rankings still drive the agenda of internationalization, there
is more emphasis now being placed on other motivations for interna-
tionalization. For example, attention is being paid to integrating inter-
national dimensions into tertiary education quality assurance mecha-
nisms, institutional policies related to student learning outcomes, and
the work of national and discipline-specific accreditation agencies.
At the same time there is a move away from internationalization

as a Western concept: “In the current global-knowledge socie-
ty, the concept of internationalization of higher education has it-
self become globalized, demanding further consideration of its
impact on policy and practice as more countries and types of insti-
tution around the world engage in the process. Internationalization

should no longer be considered in terms of a westernized, large-
ly Anglo-Saxon, and predominantly English-speaking paradigm”
[Jones, De Wit 2014].
Recent publications, have given more attention to these emerging

voices and perspectives [de Wit et al. 2017] and next generation in-
sights [Proctor, Rumbley 2018].
In other words, internationalization in higher education has evolved
over the past 30 years from a rather ad hoc, marginal and fragment-
ed phenomenon to a more central and comprehensive component of
higher education policy—although still more in rhetoric than in con-
crete action [de Wit, Rumbley 2017].
Leask, Jones and de Wit [2018] for that reason state that the im-
plementation of “internationalization of the curriculum at home” ap-
pears to be struggling to move beyond good intentions and isolated
examples of good practice. According to them we are still far away
from any form of internationalization that is inclusive and accessible
rather than elitist and exclusive, reason why they call for urgent atten-
tion to the following as a minimum:
1. We must, as scholars and practitioners, not only continue but also

escalate our efforts at working together across disciplines, profes-
sional areas and national boundaries as well as within universities.
2. We must engage more with stakeholder groups beyond the acad-
emy, striving towards the common goal of creating a better, more
equal and fairer world.
3. We must integrate internationalization with other agendas - disci-
plinary, professional, institutional, national, and regional – which
are also focused on improving the quality of education and re-
search for all students. Internationalisation of the curriculum,
teaching, learning and service should not operate in a vacuum.
4. We must place emphasis on enhancing the quality of education
and research for all students and staff in all parts of the world. This
requires integrated policy and strategy as well as cooperation and
partnership within and between institutions across the globe.
Working towards inclusive international and intercultural learning for

all’, means according to them that we become more respectful of di-
verse contexts, agendas and perspectives on a global scale.
4.3. Leadership and The evolution of internationalization, in terms of both ideas and ac-
Internationalization tions, went hand in hand with a rapid growth in the number of ad-
ministrators and academics dedicated fulltime or part-time to the
elaboration of internationalization policy and practice, in the central
administrations of institutions of higher education and in their de-
partments and faculties, in national and international agencies, in

Hans de Wit
ministries of education, and in an emerging international education

industry.
Key illustrations of the profession boom related to internationali-
zation can be seen in the development of national and regional asso-
ciations for international education—such as NAFSA: Association for
International Educators, the Association for International Education
Administrators (AIEA), the European Association for International Ed-
ucation (EAIE), and others; the rapid growth in membership and con-
ference participation of these associations; and the expanding foot-
prints of their conference exhibit halls. This boom was first evident in
Europe, North America and Australia, but then evolved to other parts
of the world, as internationalization has increasingly become a global
phenomenon [de Wit et al. 2017].
It also has resulted in an increase in numbers and variation in po-
sition and responsibilities of leadership positions in internationaliza-
tion of higher education, what in the United States of America are
called ‘Senior International Officers’, as well as in the required poli-
cy focus by institutional leaders in higher education (rectors/presi-
dents and vice-rectors/vice-presidents) concerning internationaliza-
tion. This is reflected in the number of strategic internationalization
plans by institutions of higher education, as well as the attention giv-
en by national, regional and international associations of universities,
such as ‘the ‘European Association of Universities’ (EUA) at the Eu-
ropean, and the ‘International Association of Universities’ (IAU) at the
international level.
As internationalization policies (at national and institutional levels)
evolved over the years, and international offices grew in size and com-
plexity, the need for more senior-level professionals with a broader
knowledge of international education became more evident.
As internationalization has moved from the margins of higher ed-
ucation research, policy and practice, it has become clear that the
previously disjointed approaches that characterized its earliest years
have given way to an understanding that sophisticated synergies are
required to realize its full potential. The same is true of the profession-
al development needs of those tasked to advance the cause of inter-
nationalization in order to enhance the quality and relevance of high-
er education, locally and globally.
The following points emerge from this evolving concept of interna-
tionalization of higher education.
1. Increasing importance of internationalization in the higher edu-

cation agenda
2. Policy and practice of internationalization is no longer margin-
al and ad hoc but core to the agenda of higher education leaders
3. Internationalization has become a broader agenda for all domains
of higher education policy: research, teaching and learning, and
relation to society
4. Internationalization no longer is the exclusive domain of the SIOs

and their offices, but more and more of heads of other administra-
tive and academic departments
5. Internationalization for higher education leaders has become
more than oversight of the SIO and his/her office, and signing of
MOUs
6. Budget implications are no longer marginal but both in expenses
and in income substantial
7. Internationalization is for higher education leaders a key agen-
da issue at the sector and system level, nationally, regionally and
globally [de Wit et al. 2018].
4.4. A Complex As noted by Streitwieser and Ogden [2016] “international higher ed-
Phenomenon ucation is a complex phenomenon that involves many different activi-
ties, players, institutions and realities” (p. 13).
As internationalization and global engagement become en-
trenched around the world as mainstream components of quality in
higher education, the need to ensure high quality professional prepa-
ration of those responsible for the internationalization agenda in their
respective institutions or systems of higher education becomes more
widespread and sustained. This is reflected well in the notion of “intel-
ligent internationalization,” as expressed by Rumbley [2015]:
“Intelligent internationalization” demands the development of a

thoughtful alliance between the research, practitioner, and poli-
cy communities. Those participating in the elaboration of interna-
tionalization activities and agendas [must] have access to the in-
formation, ideas, and professional skill-building opportunities that
will enhance their ability to navigate the complex and volatile high-
er education environment of the next 20 years (p. 17).
In tandem, an updated definition of internationalization emerged, re-

flecting these broader understandings of the nature and purpose of
internationalization:
“The intentional process of integrating an international, intercultur-

al or global dimension into the purpose, functions and delivery of
post-secondary education, in order to enhance the quality of edu-
cation and research for all students and staff and to make a mean-
ingful contribution to society” [de Wit et al. 2015].
5. National Policies Over the past five years, several studies by the British Council [2016;
and Strategies for 2017], the DAAD and the British Council [2014], Helms et al. [2015],
Internatio-
nalization3
3 This section builds on [de Wit et al. 2018].

Hans de Wit
de Wit et al. [2015], Crăciun [2018], and Perna et al. [2014] have
looked into national policies and strategies for internationalization,
and have generated a series of analyses, overviews, rankings, and
recommendations on them. National tertiary education international-
ization strategies and plans represent the most tangible and direct at-
tempts by governments to play an active and decisive role in relation
internationalization, but there are substantive differences in their ap-
proaches, rationales and priorities.
A worldwide census of explicit national policies carried out by
Crăciun [2018] reveals that only 11% of countries have an official strat-
egy for internationalization, most having been adopted in the last dec-
ade. Such strategies have been developed predominantly by devel-
oped countries – 3 in 4 national policies come from members of the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
European countries have taken the lead in promoting strategic think-
ing about internationalization at the national level – 2 in 3 national pol-
icies come from this world region [Crăciun 2018], and programs such
as Erasmus+ and Horizon 2020 have led to further regional harmoni-
zation of higher education systems [British Council 2017].
This is not to say that other countries have not taken measures to
promote internationalization. In fact, to support internationalization
processes, many countries have taken both direct measures (e. g.,
re-evaluating their visa policies to give preferential treatment to inter-
national students and scholars, establishing bi-lateral or multi-later-
al agreements through memoranda of understanding, and promoting
transnational education through free-trade deals) and indirect meas-
ures (e.g., supporting internationalization in political discourses and
giving universities autonomy to pursue internationalization activities).
Nevertheless, explicit national policies ensure consistency between
direct and indirect policy measures and provide a clear signaling of
government commitment to internationalization.
However, it would be a misconception to assume that national pol-
icies have common rationales and approaches to internationalization.
Differences exist between and among high-income, low-income, and
middle-income countries with respect to their policies and practices.
Also, there are differences in explicit and implicit policies and prac-
tices, with some countries having well documented plans and others
have no plans but well-defined activities.
6. Implications The main focus in internationalization strategies and plans is still at

for Institutional the institutional level. Indeed, institutions operate in many cases
Strategies without a national plan in place. Where national plans do exist, insti-
tutions may operate in conflict or in alignment with the national agen-
da. A national policy may serve as catalyst or a drag on internation-
alization processes, but are mostly seen as a highly positive element
for the advancement of internationalization. They incentivize insti-
tutions and individuals to assist in meeting national strategic goals

through internationalization. But overall, institutions are still the main
agents that drive internationalization. According to most recent sur-
vey results from the 5th Global survey on Internationalization by the
International Association of Universities (IAU) two thirds of universi-
ty leaders around the world are considering internationalization as
an important agenda issue, although Marinoni and de Wit (2019) ob-
serve that there is an increasing divide between institutions that con-
sider internationalization as of high importance and those not. They
observe that
“the reasons for such a divide between HEIs that consider interna-
tionalization extremely important and those who do not is worth a
reflection and deserves to be studied more in depth, especially if
one considers internationalization to be an essential part of all HEIs’
mission and a sign of quality.”
The challenges that institutions encounter in their internationalization

strategy are divers. There is pressure of revenue generation, competi-
tion for talents, and branding and reputation (rankings). There is pres-
sure to focus on international research and publication, on recruit-
ment of international students and scholars, and on the use of English
as language of research and instruction. These challenges and pres-
sures conflict with a more inclusive and less elitist approach to inter-
nationalization, building on the needs and opportunities of own stu-
dent and staff. In other words, there are tensions between a short term
neoliberal approach to internationalization, focusing primarily on mo-
bility and research, and a long term comprehensive quality approach,
global learning for all.
7. Lessons and The analysis above is of relevance for Russian higher education. Over
Recommendations the years, the focus in Russian higher education has been on inbound
for Russian Higher mobility of students and scholars. During the Soviet period, the main
Education rationale was political, attracting students and scholars to come to
study and become future ambassadors for the country. The People’s
Friendship University RUDN for instance finds its basis in that policy.
After the end of the Soviet Union, there was a decline in internation-
al student and scholar presence and more of an outbound mobility of
Russian students and scholars to other parts of the world, mainly
North America and Europe. More recently, national policies, including
the excellence program 5-100, are trying to return to a more inbound
recruitment strategy of international students and scholars. Econom-
ic and political rationales as well as a strive to increase the reputation
and ranking of Russian universities, are driving that agenda. Interna-
tionalization of research and publication in international peer reviewed
journals are another dimension of this agenda. The use of English for

Hans de Wit
research and teaching becomes more important. Is this a realistic

strategy?
The potential of Russian higher education is high. It can build on
a solid foundation and reputation, certainly in the sciences and en-
gineering. There are also challenges, such as the aging of the fac-
ulty, the lack of English proficiency among students and scholars,
geographical factors, lack of innovation, strong hierarchy and bu-
reaucracy, among others. Internationalization as a change and inno-
vation agent requires a dynamic, young and open culture, and a long
term approach. The ambitions, as in the 5-100 project, are unrealis-
tic in their timeframe as well as in human capital capacity and bureau-
cracy. Internationalization needs to build on people, open culture and
dynamism, and an understanding of the global, national and institu-
tional contexts.
It is recommended to focus on a more inclusive and comprehen-
sive approach:
• Do not let your institution’s strategy be driven by rankings, but let

your position in rankings be the result of your strategy
• Build your strategy on your own identity and how that is embed-
ded in your local, national and international context
• Create a comprehensive strategy for all students and faculty, do
not exclusively focus on a small elite
• Inbound Mobility is only successful if embedded in an at home
strategy: language policy, international and intercultural experi-
ence of own faculty and students, an integrated international cur-
riculum, strategic and equal partnerships.
References Altbach P.G. (2016) Global Perspectives on Higher Education. Baltimore: John
Hopkins University.
Altbach P.G, de Wit H. (2016) Internationalization and Global Tension: Lessons
from History. Global Perspectives on Higher Education (ed. P.G. Altbach),
Baltimore: John Hopkins University, pp. 73–78.
Altbach P.G., de Wit H. (2017a) Nationalism: The End of Higher Education Interna-
tionalization? Amsterdam: European Association for International Education.
Altbach P.G., de Wit H. (2017b) The New Nationalism and Internationalisation of
HE. University World News, 15 September, no 474.
Altbach P.G., Hazelkorn E. (2017) Rankings in the Age of Massification. Interna-
tional Higher Education, no 89, pp. 8–10.
Altbach P.G., Reisberg L., de Wit H. (eds) (2017) Responding to Massification:
Differentiation in Postsecondary Education Worldwide. Dordrecht: Sense
Publishers.
Beelen J., Jones E. (2015) Redefining Internationalization at Home. The Europe-
an Higher Education Area: Between Critical Reflections and Future Policies
(eds A. Curai, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi, P. Scott), Dordrecht: Spring-
er, pp. 67–80.
British Coucil (2016) The Shape of Global Higher Education: National Policies
Framework for International Engagement. Available at: www.britishcouncil.
org/education/ihe (accessed 10 May 2019).
British Coucil (2017) The Shape of Global Higher Education: International Mobili-
ty of Students, Research and Education Provision. Available at: www.british-
council.org/education/ihe (accessed 10 May 2019).
British Council, DAAD (2014) The Rationale for Sponsoring Students to Under-
take International Study. An Assessment of National Student Mobility Schol-
arship Programs. Available at: https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/
files/e002_outward_mobility_study_final_v2_web.pdf (accessed 10 May
2019).
Crăciun D. (2018) National Policies for Higher Education Internationalization: A
Global Comparative Perspective. European Higher Education Area: The Im-
pact of Past and Future Policies (eds A. Curaj, L. Deca, M. Pricopie), Cham:
Springer International Publishing, pp. 95–106.
Cunningham Ch. (1991) The Integration of International Students on Canadian
Post-Secondary Campuses. CBIE Research Paper No 1. Ottawa: Canadian
Bureau for International Education.
De Ridder-Symoens H. (1992) Mobility. A History of the University in Europe. Vol.
1: Universities in the Middle Age (ed. H. de Ridder-Symoens), Cambridge:
Cambridge University, pp. 280–304.
De Wit H. (2002) Internationalization of Higher Education in the United States
of America and Europe. A Historical, Comparative and Conceptual Analysis.
Greenwood, Connecticut: Greenwood Studies in Higher Education.
De Wit H., Altbach P.G. (2018) Higher Education as a Global Reality. Encyclope-
dia of International Higher Education Systems and Institutions (eds J.C. Shin,
P. Teixeira), Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.
De Wit H., Gacel-Ávila J., Jones E., Jooste N. (eds) (2017) The Globalization of
Internationalization, Emerging Voices and Perspectives. London and New
York: Routledge.
De Wit H., Hunter F., Howard L., Egron Polak E. (eds) (2015) Internationalization
of Higher Education. Brussels: European Parliament, Directorate-General
for Internal Policies.
De Wit H., Merkx G. (2012) The History of Internationalization of Higher Educa-
tion. The SAGE Handbook on International Higher Education (eds D. K. Dear-
dorff, H. de Wit, J.D. Heyl, T. Adams), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 43–60.
De Wit H., Rumbley L.E. (2017) Professional Development in International Edu-
cation. The Example of the Boston College MA in International Higher Edu-
cation. Internationalization of Higher Education. A Handbook, iss. 3, pp. 2–14.
De Wit H., Rumbley L.E., Craciun D., Mihut G.. Woldegiyorgis A. (2018) Interna-
tional Mapping of National Tertiary Education Internationalization Strategies
and Plans (NTEISPs). Analytical Report. Contract No 7188268.
European Commission (2013) European Higher Education in the World (COM
2013). Available at: http://www.em-a.eu/fileadmin/content/Promo/Eras-
mus__in_the_world_layouted.pdf (accessed 10 May 2019).
Goodwin C.D., Nacht M. (1991) Missing the Boat: The Failure to Internationalize
American Higher Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Hammerstein N. (1996) The Enlightenment. A History of the University in Europe.
Vol. 2: Universities in Early Modern Europe (1500-1800) (ed. W. Rüegg),Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University.
Helms R., Rumbley L, Brajkovic L., Mihut G. (2015) Internationalizing Higher Ed-
ucation Worldwide: National Policies and Programs. Available at: http://
www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/National-Policies-and-Pro-
grams-Part‑1-Global.pdf (accessed 10 May 2019).
Hudzik J. (2011) Comprehensive Internationalization: From Concept to Action.
Washington, DC: NAFSA.
Hunter F., de Wit H. (2016) The European Landscape: A Shifting Perspective. In-
ternationalization of Higher Education. A Handbook, iss. 2, pp. 49–68.

Hans de Wit
Jones E., de Wit H. (2014) Globalized Internationalization: Implications for Policy

and Practice. IIEnetworker, Spring 2014, pp. 28–29.
Kerr C. (1994) Higher Education Cannot Escape History: Issues for the Twen-
ty-first Century. SUNY Series Frontiers in Education. Albany: State Univer-
sity of New York.
Knight J. (2012) Concepts, Rationales, and Interpretive Frameworks in the Inter-
nationalization of Higher Education. The SAGE Handbook on International
Higher Education (eds D. K. Deardorff, H. de Wit, J. D. Heyl, T. Adams), Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 27–42.
Leask B. (2015) Internationalizing the Curriculum. New York: Routledge, Abing-
don, Oxon.
Leask B., Jones E., de Wit H. (2018) Towards Inclusive Intercultural Learning for
All. University World News, 7 December, no 532.
Marginson S. (2017) Do Rankings Drive Better Academic Performance? Interna-
tional Higher Education, no 89, pp. 6–7.
Marinoni G., de Wit H. (2019) Internationalization and Inequality. First Results
from the 5th Global Survey of IAU. University World News, January 2019.
Neave G. (1997) The European Dimension in Higher Education: An Historical Anal-
ysis. Background Document to the Conference “The Relationship between
Higher Education and the State” (7–9 April 1997, Enschede).
Perna L. W., Orosz K., Gopaul B., Jumakulov Z., Ashirbekov A., Kishkentayeva
M. (2014) Promoting Human Capital Development: A Typology of Interna-
tional Scholarship Programs in Higher Education. Educational Researcher,
vol. 20, no 10, pp. 1–11.
Proctor D., Rumbley L. E. (2018) The Future Agenda for Internationalization in
Higher Education, Next Generation Insights into Research, Policy, and Prac-
tice. London and New York: Routledge.
Rumbley L. E. (2015) “Intelligent Internationalization“: A 21st Century Imperative.
International Higher Education, no 80, pp. 16–17.
Salmi J. (2009) The Challenge of Establishing World-Class Universities: Direc-
tions in Development. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Scott P. (1998) Massification, Internationalization and Globalization. The Globali-
zation of Higher Education (ed. P. Scott), Buckingham: SRHE and Open Uni-
versity Press, pp. 108–129.
Streitwieser B., Ogden A. (eds) (2016) International Higher Education’s Schol-
ar-Practitioners, Bridging Research and Practice. Oxford: Symposium Books.
Van der Wende M. (2001) Internationalization Policies: About New Trends and
Contrasting Paradigms. Higher Education Policy, vol. 14, no 3, pp. 249–259.
Yudkevich M., Altbach P. G., Rumbley L. E. (eds) (2016) The Global Academic
Rankings Game. Changing Institutional Policy, Practice, and Academic Life.
New York and London: Routledge.
Transformative and Selective Systems: A Study in
Comparative Sociology of Academic Markets Careers
Author Mikhail Sokolov

Candidate of Sciences in Sociology, Professor, European University at St. Pe-
tersburg. Address: 6/1a Gagarinskaya Str., 191187 St. Petersburg, Russian Fed-
eration. E-mail: msokolov@eu.spb.ru
Abstract The article explores the relationship between academic career structure and
labor market organization characterizing different national academic systems.
Selective and transformative systems are described as two opposite ideal
types. The principal constitutive difference between them is that the selective
system requires scholars to move between organizations at least ones during
their academic career, and introduces time limits for staying at the lower steps
of the academic ladder, while transformative systems do not prohibit inbreed-
ing or ban staying indefinitely at lower academic ranks. The academic systems
of Great Britain, Germany, Russia, USA, and France are used to demonstrate
how this fundamental difference is related to many other parameters of insti-
tutional organization of national academic worlds, such as labor market com-
petitiveness, selection procedures complexity, whether the labor market is
driven by supply or demand, the level of geographic mobility, the presence of
tenure, the role of formal indicators in academic productivity assessment, and
the overall status of the academic profession.
Keywords national academic system, selective academic system, transformative academ-

ic system, academic labour markets, recruitment, selection process, academ-
ic mobility, tenure, academic career, inbreeding.
DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-35-77
References Allison P. D., Long J. S., Krauze T. K. (1982) Cumulative Advantage and Inequal-
ity in Science. American Sociological Review, vol. 47, no 5, pp. 615–625.
Altbach P. G. (ed.) (2012) Paying the Professoriate: A Global Comparison of Com-
pensation and Contracts. New York: Routledge.
Baldi S. (1995) Prestige Determinants of First Academic Jobs of New Sociolo-
gy PhDs, 1983–1992. The Sociological Quarterly, vol. 36, no 4, pp. 777–789.
Belyaeva O. (2011) Akademicheskoe soobshchestvo Peterburgskogo universite-
ta v rektorstvo E. D. Grimma: konflikty v professorskoy srede [The Academic
Community of the University of St Petersburg under the Rector E. D. Grimm:
Conflicts among the Professors]. Dialogue with Time, iss. 34, pp. 215–235.
Ben-David J. (1971) Centers of Learning: Britain, France, Germany, United States.
London: Transaction Publishers.
Bloor D. (1978) Polyhedra and Abomination of Leviticus. The British Journal for
the History of Science, vol. 11, no 3, pp. 245–272.
Burris V. (2004) The Academic Caste System: Prestige Hierarchies in PhD Ex-
change Networks. The American Sociological Review, vol. 69, no 2, pp. 234–
264.
Camacho J. P. (2001) Investment Is the Best Cure for Inbreeding. Nature, vol. 413,
pp. 479–480.
Caplow T., McGee R. (1958) The Academic Marketplace. New Brunswick, NJ:
Transaction.
Carmichael H. L. (1988) Incentives in Academics: Why is there Tenure? Journal
of Political Economy, vol. 96, no 3, pp. 453–472.

Mikhail Sokolov
Transformative and Selective Systems
Clark B. (1977) Academic Power in Italy. Bureaucracy and Oligarchy in National

University System. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Clark B. R. (1986) The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in
Cross-National Perspective. Berkeley; Los Angeles; London: University of
California.
Correll S. J., Ridgeway C. L., Zuckerman E. W., Jank S., Jordan-Bloch S., Nak-
agawa S. (2017) It’s the Conventional Thought that Counts: How Third-Or-
der Inference Produces Status Advantage. American Sociological Review,
vol. 82, no 2, pp. 297–327.
Crane D. (1965) Scientists at Major and Minor Universities: A Study of Productivity
and Recognition. American Sociological Review, vol. 30, no 5, pp. 699–714.
Crane D. (1969) Social Class Origin and Academic Success: The Influence of
Two Stratification Systems on Academic Careers. Sociology of Education,
vol. 42, no 1, pp. 1–17.
Crane D. (1970) The Academic Marketplace Revisited: A Study of Faculty Mobil-
ity Using Carter Ratings. The American Journal of Sociology, vol. 75, no 6,
pp. 953–964.
DiMaggio P., Powell W. (1983) The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism
and Collective Rationality in Institutional Fields. The American Sociological
Review, vol. 48, no 2, pp. 147–160.
Doeringer P. B., Piore M. J. (1985) Internal Labor Markets and Manpower Analy-
sis. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Eells W. C., Cleveland A. C. (1935) The Effects of Inbreeding. The Journal of High-
er Education, vol. 6, no 6, pp. 323–328.
Eisenberg T., Wells M. T. (2000) Inbreeding in Law School Hiring: Assessing the
Performance of Faculty Hired from Within. Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 29,
no 1, pp. 369–388.
Enders J. (2001) Between State Control and Academic Capitalism: A Compar-
ative Perspective on Academic Staff in Europe. Academic Staff in Europe:
Changing Contexts and Conditions (ed. J. Enders), Westport, CT: Green-
wood, pp. 1–24.
Enders J., Musselin Ch. (2008) Back to the Future? The Academic Professions in
the 21st Century. Higher Education to 2030, vol. 1, pp. 125–150.
Etzioni A. (1959) Authority Structure and Organizational Effectiveness. Adminis-
trative Science Quarterly, vol. 4, no 1, pp. 43–67.
Godechot O., Louvet A. (2010) Academic Inbreeding: An Evaluation. Available at:
http://www.booksandideas.net/Academic-Inbreeding-An-Evaluation.html
(accessed 22 April 2019).
Gorelova O. (2016) Mezhvuzovskaya mobilnost prepodavateley rossiyskikh vu-
zov [Cross-University Mobility of University Teaching Staff in Russia]. Vo-
prosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 2, pp. 229–258. doi:
10.17323/1814-9545-2016-2-229-258.
Gouldner A. (1957) Cosmopolitans and Locals: Toward an Analysis of Latent So-
cial Roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 2, no 3, pp. 281–306.
Guba K. (2015) “Merton College”: ot kontseptualizstsii k empiricheskoy pro-
gramme sotsiologii nauki [“Merton College”: from Conceptualization to Em-
pirical Research Program of the Sociology of Science]. The Journal of Soci-
ology and Social Anthropology, no 2, pp. 130–145.
Guba K. (2011) Publish or perish, ili Razvenchanie meritokratii v nauke [Publish
or Perish, or Debunking the meritocracy in science]. Voprosy obrazovaniya
/ Educational Studies Moscow, no 3, pp. 210–225. doi: 10.17323/1814-9545-
2011-3-210-225.
Han S.-K. (2003) Tribal Regimes in Academia: A Comparative Analysis of Market
Structures across Disciplines. Social Networks, vol. 25, no 3, pp. 251–280.
Hargens L., Hagstrom W. (1967) Sponsored and Contest Mobility of Academic

Scientists. Sociology of Education, vol. 40, no 1, pp. 24–38.
Headworth S., Freese J. (2015) Credential Privilege or Cumulative Advantage?
Prestige, Productivity, and Placement in the Academic Sociology Job Mar-
ket. Social Forces, vol. 94, no 3, pp. 1257–1282.
Jencks C., Riesman D. (2002) The Academic Revolution. New Brunswick; Lon-
don: Transaction Publishers.
Kostina T. (2013) Professora “starye” i “novye”: “antikollegialnaya” reforma
S. S. Uvarova [Professors, “Old” and “New”: Sergey Uvarov’s “Anti-Collegi-
al” Reform]. Soslovie russkikh professorov. Sozdateli statusov i smyslov [The
Professoriate Caste in Russia: Generators of Statuses and Meanings] (eds
E. Vishlenkova, I. Savelyeva), Moscow: HSE, pp. 212–238.
Kozlova L. (2001) “Bez zashchity dissertatsii…”: statusnaya organizatsiya obsh-
chestvennykh nauk v SSSR, 1933–1935 gg. [Non-Thesis Degrees: Making
Up the Status of Social Sciences in the Soviet Union, 1933–1935]. Sociolog-
ical Journal, no 2, pp. 145–158.
Lamont M. (2009) How Professors Think. Inside the Curious World of Academic
Judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Latour B., Woolgar S. (1979) Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scien-
tific Facts. London; Beverley Hills: Sage.
Long J. S., Allison P. D., McGinnis R. (1993) Rank Advancement in Academic Ca-
reers: Sex Differences and the Effects of Productivity. American Sociologi-
cal Review, vol. 58, no 3, pp. 703–722.
Masten S. E. (2006) Authority and Commitment: Why Universities, Like Legis-
latures, are not Organized as Firms. Journal of Economics & Management
Strategy, vol. 15, no 3, pp. 649–684.
McGee R. (1960) The Function of Institutional Inbreeding. American Journal of
Sociology, vol. 65, no 5, pp. 483–488.
McKenzie R. (1996) In Defense of Academic Tenure. Journal of Institutional and
Theoretical Economics (JITE) / Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissen-
schaft, vol. 152, no 2, pp. 325–341.
Merton R. (1968) The Matthew Effect in Science. Science, vol. 159, pp. 56–63.
Merton R. (1973) The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investiga-
tions. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Meyer J., Schofer W. (2005) The Worldwide Expansion of Higher Education in
the Twentieth Century. American Sociological Review, vol. 70, no 6, pp. 898–
920.
Musselin C. (2005) European Academic Labor Markets in Transition. Higher Ed-
ucation, vol. 49, no 1–2, pp. 135–154.
Musselin C. (2009) The Market for Academics. London: Routledge.
Pfeffer J., Leong A., Strehl K. (1977) Paradigm Development and Particularism:
Journal Publication in Three Scientific Disciplines. Social Forces, vol. 55,
no 4, pp. 938–951.
Phelan S., Lin Z. (2001) Promotion Systems and Organizational Performance:
A Contingency Model. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory,
vol. 7, no 3, pp. 207–232.
Prentice D. A., Miller D. T. (1993) Pluralistic Ignorance and Alcohol Use on Cam-
pus: Some Consequences of Misperceiving the Social Norm. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, vol. 64, no 2, pp. 210–243.
Rijcke S. D., Wouters P. F., Rushforth A. D., Franssen T. P., Hammarfelt B. (2015)
Evaluation Practices and Effects of Indicator Use—A Literature Review. Re-
search Evaluation, vol. 25, no 2, pp. 161–169.
Rosovsky H. (1991) The University: A Owner’s Manual. New York: W. W. Norton
& Company.

Mikhail Sokolov
Transformative and Selective Systems
Shapin S. (1994) A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seven-

teenth-Century England. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Siow A. (1998) Tenure and Other Unusual Personnel Practices in Academia. Jour-
nal of Law, Economics, & Organization, vol. 14, no 1, pp. 152–173.
Sivak E., Yudkevich M. (2009) Akademicheskiy inbriding: za i protiv [Academ-
ic Inbreeding: Pro and Contra]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies
Moscow, no 1, pp. 170–187. doi: 10.17323/1814-9545-2009-1-170-187.
Shore C., Wright S. (1999) Audit Culture and Anthropology: Neo-Liberalism in
British Higher Education. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, no 2,
pp. 557–575.
Skocpol T., Sommers M. (1980) The Uses of Comparative History in Macrosoci-
ological Inquiry. Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol. 22, no 2,
pp. 174–198.
Sokolov M. (2011) Rynki truda, stratifikatsiya i karjery v sovetskoy sotsiologii [La-
bor Markets, Stratification and Careers in Soviet Sociology]. Economic So-
ciology, no 4, pp. 37–72.
Sokolov M., Lopatina S., Yakovlev G. (2018) Ot tovarishchestva k uchrezhdeni-
yam: konstitutsionnaya istoriya rossiyskikh vuzov [From Partnerships to
Bureaucracies: The Constitutional Evolution of Russian Universities]. Vo-
10.17323/1814-9545-2018-3-120-145.
Sokolov M., Chuykina S., Safonova M., Zimenkova T., Guba K. (2015) Kak stano-
vyatsya professorami: akademicheskie karyery, rynki i vlast v pyati stranakh
[How Professors Are Appointed: Academic Careers, Academic Marketplace,
and Academic Power across Five Countries]. Moscow: The New Literary Ob-
server.
Starr P. (1982) The Social Transformation of American Medicine. New York: Ba-
sic Books.
Stephans P. (1996) The Economics of Science. Journal of Economic Literature,
vol. 34, no 3, pp. 1199–1235.
White H. (1970) Chains of Opportunity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Williamson O. E. (1981) The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost
Approach. The American Journal of Sociology, vol. 87, no 3, pp. 548–577.
Wuthnow R. (1979) The Emergence of Modern Science and World-System The-
ory. Theory and Society, vol. 8, no 2, pp. 215–293.
Yudkevich M., Gorelova O. (2015) Akademicheskiy inbriding: prichiny i posled-
stviya [Academic Inbreeding: Causes and Consequenses]. University Man-
agement: Practice and Analysis, no 1, pp. 73–83.
Influence of School Climate on
Bullying Prevalence: Russian
and International Research
Experience
Received in Maria Novikova specifically its prevalence, age, gen-

November 2017 Candidate of Sciences in Psychology, der and socioeconomic correlates, as
Research Fellow, Laboratory for Pre- well as effectiveness of most common
vention of Antisocial Behavior, Institute antibullying programs. Social relation-
of Education, National Research Univer- ships, both between students and teach-
sity Higher School of Economics. Email: ers and among peers, are discussed as
mnovikova@hse.ru a significant factor of victimization. In
Arthur Rean particular, we provide data on teachers’
Doctor of Sciences in Psychology, Pro- perceptions of bullying, their preferred
fessor; Head of the Laboratory for Pre- coping strategies, and the influence of
vention of Antisocial Behavior, Institute teacher-student relationships on stu-
of Education, National Research Univer- dent involvement in bullying. The pa-
sity Higher School of Economics. Email: per is designed analytically and based
arean@hse.ru mostly on the findings presented in
the past 10 years’ Russian and foreign
Address: 20 Myasnitskaya St, 101000
studies.
Moscow, Russian Federation.
Keywords: bullying, victimization,
Abstract. The phenomenon of school teachers’ perceptions of bullying, teach-
bullying is considered from the perspec- ers’ behavior strategies, effectiveness of
tive of its relation to various school cli- antibullying programs.
mate components. The main charac-
teristics of school bullying are given, DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-78-97
School Bullying: This article aims at identifying school climate characteristics af-
Types, Age fecting the prevalence of aggressive behaviors, bullying in the first
Peculiarities, and place. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention de-
Prevention fines bullying as any unwanted aggressive behavior that involves
Effectiveness an observed or perceived power imbalance, is repeated multi-
ple times, and may inflict harm or distress on the victim including
physical, psychological, social, or educational harm [Gladden et al.
Translated from 2014]. Bullying always occurs in a specific social context that sup-
Russian by ports and encourages behaviors of this type, thus making them
I. Zhuchkova.
more likely to be repeated in the future. Bullying might take place

Influence of School Climate on Bullying Prevalence: Russian and International Research Experience
in different settings and collectives; this article zeroes in on school

bullying.
Three types of bullying have been traditionally identified: physical,
verbal, and social. Bullying can also be direct or indirect depending on
whether the victim is able to identify the bully (indirect bullying is more
typical of girls, given the social taboo against female aggression [Un-
derwood 2003]). Researchers and practitioners also recognize cyber-
bullying, which is when bullies use the anonymity and outreach oppor-
tunities of the Internet for harassment purposes [Bochaver, Khlomov
2014]. In a bullying situation, youths may act as victims, bullies, or by-
standers; behavioral choices of the latter include bully followers (as-
sistants), outsiders, and defenders of victims [Olweus 2013].
According to a cross-country meta-analysis of 80 studies, on av-
erage 35% of school students are involved in some form of bullying
[Zych et al. 2017]. Prevalence of bullying is assessed in the PISA Well-
being Report. According to the 2015 results, Russia’s victimization
rate is significantly higher than the OECD average: 27% of Russian
school students report being bullied on a regular basis, and 9.5% are
bullied or witness bullying acts frequently (as compared to the OECD
averages of 18.7 and 8.9%, respectively).
Most studies find that bullying prevalence is decreasing with age
[Whitney, Smith 1993; Konishi et al. 2017]. It was shown on a sample
of Russian school students that 15.7% of children were victims of bul-
lying in Grade 6, 12.3% in Grades 7–8, and 6% in Grades 9–10 [Sa-
fronova 2014]. However, another study found no significant decrease
in peer victimization between Grades 6 and 9 [Alexandrov et al. 2018].
The highest rate of bullying is observed among boys and girls aged 13–
14, decreasing with age for girls and remaining high for boys until the
age of 16 [Vishnevskaya, Butovskaya 2010]. By far the majority of el-
ementary school children (aged 8–10) know about the means of bul-
lying, even though 40% hardly ever use them. At the same time, 13%
of elementary school students employ bullying tactics actively [Bu-
tovskaya, Lutsenko, Tkachuk 2012].
Types of bullying differ between rural and urban schools in Rus-
sia. Verbal abuse is the most common form overall, with insults be-
ing the most popular means. However, insults are observed 1.5 times
more often in urban areas than in rural ones. Physical aggression is
more typical of megalopolises, just as direct bullying, whereas rural
students are more likely to be involved in indirect forms of perpetra-
tion [Butovskaya, Rusakova 2016]. According to Daniil Alexandrov and
his co-authors, the risk of being bullied is not affected by the type of
school (secondary school, middle school, gymnasium)1. Yet, there is
1 Even though Prof. Alexandrov and his co-authors use the wording “experi-
ence of being bullied and cyberbullied” in their survey scale titles, we be-
lieve that it would be more proper to talk about peer aggression, since the
items offered to children do not make allowance for the specific character-
a difference in how often a child will witness peer aggression towards

other peers and teachers: the lowest bystanding rates are observed
in middle schools, while those in secondary schools and gymnasiums
are pretty much the same [Alexandrov et al. 2018].
A number of foreign researchers [Del Rey, Ortega 2008, Lister
2015] have found that social stratification factors (parental educa-
tion and family income) affect adolescents’ social wellbeing at school,
which has been confirmed on a Russian sample. Children whose par-
ents did not attend college are significantly more likely to be bullied
physically and psychologically than children with college-educated
parents. Students from well-off families report having no school bul-
lying experience of any type in nearly half of the cases, while the pro-
portion is 15% lower among low-income students [Sobkin, Smyslova
2012]. In Finland, however, socioeconomic status and ethnicity are
not significant predictors of bullying, unlike social hierarchy and group
norms in classroom and school as well as teacher-student relation-
ships [Saarento, Salmivalli 2015].
Involvement in school bullying has immediate and long-term con-
sequences, affecting victims, perpetrators, and bystanders [Zych et
al. 2017]. Students who are bullied show less academic improvement,
tend to skip school more often, and engage less in classroom activ-
ities [Buhs 2005; Nakamoto, Schwartz 2010]. Some recent studies
have shown that bullying can lead to clinical depression [Ford et al.
2017] and suicidal thoughts [Lardier et al. 2016].
The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP), the first of its
kind, was put into life as part of the Bergen Project in 1982–1985. The
program includes a set of strategies to be implemented at different
levels: school level, classroom level, and individual level. The program
is focused primarily on increasing school community awareness, en-
suring strong disapproval of bullying behaviors by adults, and provid-
ing measures to support and protect victims [Olweus 2013]. The KiVa
(short for kiusaamista vastaan which means “against bullying”; kiva
also means “nice” or “friendly” in Finnish) is another popular antibul-
lying project [Salmivalli et al. 2013].
The question naturally arises, to what extent bullying prevention
programs are effective. A meta-analysis of studies [Farrington, Ttofi
2009] shows that victimization rates are approximately 20% lower
in the countries where antibullying initiatives are used most actively
(United States, Great Britain, and Scandinavia) than in the countries
with no bullying prevention policies. However, a meta-analysis of pub-
lications assessing the effectiveness of twelve U.S. antibullying pro-
grams, backed by statistics on highly visible tragedies in high schools,
reveals a sharp drop in efficacy of such programs in the 8th grade and
istics of bullying, namely power imbalance, repetition, hostile intent, and dif-
ficulty for the victim to defend oneself.

beyond; moreover, antibullying interventions sometimes even have a

negative effect in older adolescents [Yeager et al. 2015].
Parents believe that schools are not too successful in preventing
bullying behaviors. The overwhelming majority of U.S. parents expe-
rience ongoing resistance when they report bullying to school officials
and have to choose between removing their youth from the school or
let the victimization continue [Brown, Aalsma, Ott 2013]. In a recent
survey of 160 Australian parents, 80 respondents reported that their
child had been bullied at school, and 36% of them reported that the
school did nothing about it [Rigby 2017].
Therefore, the bullying problem is far from being solved even in the
countries with antibullying legislation (United States, Australia, Ger-
many, and others). Traditionally, the risk factors for bullying include
family characteristics, individual student characteristics, and school
characteristics, such as socioeconomic background of the student
body, human resources, location, and financial sustainability (a simi-
lar set of indicators makes the so-called School Social Wellbeing In-
dex [Pinskaya, Kosaretskiy, Froumin 2011]).
This study seeks to identify the key characteristics of school cli-
mate — first of all, teacher-student relationships, teachers’ percep-
tions of bullying, and their most effective response strategies — that
may act as risk or protective factors of bullying victimization. Analysis
involves the results of Russian and foreign studies mostly produced
in the past decade; the criteria for selecting empirical articles includ-
ed sample size, sample representativeness, and the use of quantita-
tive data analysis methods.
School Most researchers identify the following components of school climate:

Climate as (i) peer relationships, (ii) physical environment (school and classroom
a Factor of design characteristics), (iii) student-specific factors (sense of belong-
Bullying ing, discipline), and (iv) organizational culture (expectations, rules,
and norms) [Chirkina, Khavenson 2017]. The existing “concept of
school climate lies at the intersection of school structure and school
culture.” [Fedunina 2014, p.:117]
School climate became an independent subject of research in
the second half of the 20th century. Between the mid‑1960s and the
1990s, it was mostly explored in the context of studying the factors of
academic achievement. In recent decades, researchers have come
to examine school climate at the level of teacher-student interac-
tions, in terms of its influence on student motivation, socialization,
behavior, and prevalence of school violence. Building a safe learn-
ing environment has been recognized as part of the school’s fun-
damental mission [Fedunina, Sugizaki 2012], with more and more
researchers treating school climate as a construct that allows pre-
dicting bullying prevalence and at the same time provides leverage to
prevent it.
The school climate components related directly or indirectly to bul-

lying prevalence include school safety (norms and rules, physical and
perceived safety), school connectedness and the sense of belonging
(in students as well as in parents), and social relationships (between
teachers and students, and among peers). For instance, clear and un-
ambiguous rules, perceived by students as “fair” and “unbreakable”,
have been found to positively reduce bullying [Ma 2002; Aldridge, Mc-
Chesney, Afari 2018]. It is critical that violation of rules, which includes
bullying and other aggressive behaviors, should entail certain con-
sequences for any student or teacher, and that students should be
engaged in the development of school rules and regulations [Guer-
ra, Williams, Sadek 2011]. A recent study by a Swedish research team
shows that schools differ strongly by the proportion of students who
are aware of the rules at school (from 52 to 100% across the sample)
as well by perceived student involvement in decision making (from 0
to 92.5% across the sample) [Laftman, Östberg, Modin 2017].
Relationships with teachers are a crucial factor of bullying preva-
lence [Mucherah et al. 2018; Alexandrov et al. 2018]. Students must
be assured that they can easily seek help from adults in a conflict situ-
ation [Eliot et al. 2010]. In schools where teachers and other students
tend to intervene against bullying, fewer students report having been
bullied [Laftman, Östberg, Modin 2017]. However, victims do not al-
ways ask for help. Duration and frequency of victimization do not pre-
dict help seeking from the teacher [Hunter, Boyle 2004], and the pro-
portion of children who are bullied for a long period of time but do not
tell anyone is significantly higher that the proportion of those who re-
port bullying and break the vicious circle. Richard S. Newman’s theo-
ry of adaptive and non-adaptive help seeking [Newman 2008] states
that victims of bullying decide whether or not to seek help from the
teacher by assessing possible negative outcomes of such help seek-
ing. So, what are the negative expectations that make adolescents re-
fuse from asking for help even if they know that the teacher will defi-
nitely stop the bullying? In a study on British school students, Michael
J. Boulton and his colleagues identified three most common perceived
barriers preventing students from disclosing bullying to teachers even
if they knew that it could help: peer disapproval (75.5%), feeling weak/
undermined in case of disclosure (64.2%), and desire for autono-
my, i. e. desire to solve the problem by themselves (58.8%) [Boulton
et al. 2017]. The rates of help seeking for bullying are lower in high
school (8th‑11th grades) than in middle school, in boys than in girls,
and in persistently bullied students than in first-time victims. There-
fore, even the conviction that teacher’s help could be effective is of-
ten not enough for bullied children to seek help, as help seeking is as-
sociated with losing social status (however low it already may be) and
self-respect.
A series of interviews with bullied youth conducted by Swed-
ish researchers shows that deciding whether or not to continue dis-

closing victimization is even harder for bullied children than deciding

whether or not to actually tell adults about bullying [Bjereld, Dane-
back, Petzold 2017]. Continuing to disclose victimization was closely
associated with adults’ reactions after finding out about the bullying.
Victims who felt they had not been listened to or taken seriously did
not continue to disclose bullying. This is probably why children who
have poor quality relationships with teachers and parents are more
likely to be victimized [Ibid.]. Of nearly 7,000 11-, 13-, and 15-year-
old Swedish school students included in the study, 5.5% reported
frequent victimization. Frequent victims were significantly more likely
to report not feeling confidence in teachers, finding it difficult to talk
to their parents, and experiencing that their family did not listen to
what they had to say.
Teacher-child relationships are an independent factor affect-
ing children’s levels of victimization regardless of their friendships
[Serdiouk, Berry, Gest 2016]. However many or few friends a child
might have, positive and supportive relationships with a teacher are
a significant predictor of lower levels of victimization. In a longitudi-
nal study, 1st-, 3rd-, and 5th-grade students were followed across
the school year. Children with a greater number of friends tend-
ed to be victimized less in the 3rd and 5th grades, but not in the 1st
grade―which indicates that perceived importance of peer opinions
grows with age. The importance of positive teacher-child relation-
ships did not vary over time. Similar results were obtained in anoth-
er study, where peer support was found to be a significant predic-
tor of lower bullying rates in high-risk secondary students (Grades
7–12), and adult support in school was associated with lower bully-
ing prevalence in high-risk elementary students (Grades 3–5) [Gage,
Prykanowsky, Larson 2014].
Bullying is always closely related to social context and never oc-
curs outside of it. This has led to the hypothesis that influence of stu-
dent-teacher relationships on bullying-related behaviors differs as
a function of students’ social statuses [Longobardi et al. 2018]. Us-
ing sociometric data, the researchers divided 435 middle school stu-
dents (Grades 6–8) into four groups: popular, rejected, neglected,
and controversial. It was found that bullying was most often initiated
by rejected students who had conflictual relationships with teachers.
The same relation, yet much weaker, was observed for popular and
controversial students. In neglected students, close student-teach-
er relationships were positively associated with pro-bully behaviors.
It can be assumed that rejected students perceive active behaviors
such as having conflicts with teachers and peers as a means to gain
social status; they do not fear conflicts as they have little to lose. As
for neglected students, they have no conflictual relations with peers.
Even though they feel that they are not preferred by other students,
they also feel that their position in the social hierarchy does not give
them the necessary power to become bullies. On the other hand,
neglected students who have established close relationships with

teachers try to act as pro-bullies whenever possible, as a means to
become less neglected as they take part in activities together with
their peers and may gain support from other students over time.
Teachers’ Percep- Teachers’ understanding of bullying determines how they respond to

tions of School problematic situations [Swearer, Hymel 2015]. How teachers under-
Bullying and stand and respond to incidents is influenced by whether they view an
Preferred Coping incident as serious or consider the victimized child responsible, wheth-
Strategies er the child matches their assumptions about victim characteristics and
behaviors, and whether they feel empathy for the child [Mishna et al.
2005]. Teachers’ implicit perceptions of bullying are related to student
gender and age and affect their choice of coping strategy [Kochen-
derfer-Ladd, Pelletier 2008]. Bullying among boys is more likely to be
treated as an inevitable evil, i. e. to be perceived as normative behav-
ior. The reason for this must be the tendency of boys to exhibit aggres-
sive behavior more often than girls, which is always manifest. Teach-
ers tend to intervene less often in bullying incidents involving boys,
as boys are expected to be able to stand up for themselves. Teach-
ers rarely give advice like “Take the bullies down a peg” to boys, prob-
ably trying to avoid causing even more aggression. This assumption
has been proved empirically: classes where teachers urge children to
“whack the bully back” show increased victimization levels in boys and
highly aggressive girls [Troop-Gordon, Ladd 2015]. Meanwhile, vic-
timization is lower for boys in classes where teachers simply encour-
age students to be able to stand up for themselves. In this case, boys
probably start trying to defend themselves in non-aggressive ways.
Most Kenyan high school students report that teachers stop peer
perpetration when they see it; the percentages were 85% in all-girls
schools and 95% in all-boys schools2 [Mucherah et al. 2018]. The au-
thors did not find any difference in the prevalence of bullying as a func-
tion of student gender or age, but they found a relation between bul-
lying and the type of school. The odds of becoming a perpetrator or
a victim was found significantly higher in all-girls schools than in all-
boys schools. This study does not provide sufficient information to
judge whether bullying rates among boys are lower because teach-
ers in all-boys schools intervene in bullying incidents more often, or
recognize them better, or address them proactively, falling under the
stereotype about boys being more aggressive than girls.
Russian teachers have rather accurate perceptions of bullying
types and manifestations, which are in line with the existing scientif-
ic findings [Bochaver, Zhilinskaya, Khlomov 2015]. As teachers de-
2 In Kenya’s education system, the most prestigious national high schools are
predominantly single sex boarding schools.

scribe bullying incidents, they mention both direct (verbal abuse,

physical aggression, mockery, humiliation) and indirect (rejection, ne-
glect) forms of bullying. When explaining the phenomenon of bullying,
teachers largely maintain that bullying occurs along one of the two
major patterns, “xenophobia (peers)—otherness (victim)” or “need for
power and authority (perpetrator)—fear of neglect (onlookers)”. The
respondents were well-informed of the broad array of possible neg-
ative outcomes of bullying “affecting not only the victim and the per-
petrator but also the bystanders and the teachers, which indicates
that they are probably motivated to prevent bullying.” [Ibid.:113] When
teachers describe their bullying responses, the tremendous gap be-
tween what they know and how they behave becomes obvious. The-
oretical knowledge almost never translates into daily practices, and
most of the time teachers respond to bullying spontaneously, relying
on their previous experience and intuition.
Three major teacher strategies to deal with bullying were identified
based on a large survey of U.S. school teachers and their students
[Troop-Gordon, Ladd 2015]. Teachers convinced that victims should
be able to stand up to aggressors often give advice of this kind to their
bullied students. They also contact parents a lot, probably to encour-
age them to help their children learn to defend themselves against
bullies. Perceiving the teacher as actively contacting parents may be
linked to higher victimization levels among boys, but not among girls.
In high school, parental assistance is perceived by bullies as indica-
tion that the victim is weak and helpless on his/her own. Teachers
who regard bullying as normative behavior are less likely to intervene
when they see or learn about an incident; they never help the victim
unless they feel personal sympathy for the child. The third catego-
ry includes teachers who believe that the best way to safeguard vic-
timized children is to enable them to avoid aggressive peers. Such
teachers help victims find ways to walk away from perpetrators and
try to separate aggressors and victims in the classroom to reduce in-
teractions between them. They also help victimized children find other
peers to play and communicate with. This strategy is vitally important
and deeply justified psychologically. The need for affiliation and be-
longing is a fundamental human need. With bullying, it is not enough
to isolate the victim from the bully or group of bullies; the victimized
child should be included in a group that will make them feel safe and
connected. Isolation alone, without inclusion, will only trigger chron-
ic stress in the victim.
German scholars asked 625 teachers, of whom about 75% were
women, to assess a hypothetical bullying episode in terms of which
intervention strategy they would prefer [Burger et al. 2015]. The op-
tions included working with victims, working with bullies, involving oth-
er adults, ignoring the incident, and authority-based interventions.
The great majority of the teachers (82%) preferred punitive authori-
ty-based interventions. The second most popular strategy was work-
ing with bullies, followed by involvement of other adults. Working with

victims was the second least popular option, and none of the respond-
ents was willing to ignore the incident. Similar structures of teachers’
antibullying strategies, with authority-based interventions and puni-
tive measures prevailing, have also been observed in Great Britain,
Finland, and the United States. The danger of this approach is that
teachers do not attempt to teach bullies feel empathy for victims, or
understand the harm they have caused and the victim’s feelings. Pu-
nitive measures usually have short-term outcomes, so aggressors try
to switch to covert forms of bullying that are less identifiable.
A number of foreign studies have proved harsh discipline and pu-
nitive interventions in bullying to be ineffective. A team of Philippine re-
searchers conducted a survey of high school students (M age = 14.3
years, N = 401) to examine how the experience of harsh teacher dis-
cipline, verbal (being rude) and physical (slapping, etc.), is related to
students’ experience of bullying victimization and perceived teach-
er support [Banzon-Librojo, Garabiles, Alampay 2017]. The findings
were described using a structural model which shows that experienc-
es of harsh teacher discipline predicted higher bullying victimization
and students’ negative perception of teacher support. Unlike in stud-
ies based on European samples, negative perception of teacher sup-
port is not related to bullying prevalence in the Philippine sample. This
could possibly be explained by the Philippine school culture, which re-
gards teacher as a distant and rather authoritarian figure who is not
wired to support students or care about their psychological wellbeing.
Harsh disciplines (whether verbal pressure and rudeness or phys-
ical abuse, such as hitting with a ruler on the knuckles) legitimize vio-
lence towards others, making students replicate violent behaviors in
interpersonal communication; this is a cross-cultural pattern, by and
large. Estonian scholars have found empirical evidence for the impact
of teachers’ controlling behavior on students’ feelings and bullying
behavior (M age = 12.9 years, N = 600) [Hein, Koka, Hagger 2015]. In
their study, school children were asked to assess the behavior of their
physical education teachers. The structural equation model created
by the authors discriminates among four teachers’ controlling strat-
egies: controlling use of praise and extrinsic rewards, negative con-
ditional regard (e. g. “you have really let me down”), intimidation, and
excessive controlling behavior (interference in aspects of students’
lives that are not directly associated with their schooling). Two of these
controlling strategies—negative conditional regard and intimidation—
were found to predict students’ perceived thwarting of basic psycho-
logical needs (for autonomy, competence, and relatedness―accord-
ing to Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory that the authors drew
upon), which made them feel anger and turn to aggressive behavior.
In other words, if the student’s sense of autonomy has been dimin-
ished as a result of teachers’ controlling behavior, it may lead to the
use of direct and hostile strategies to control his or her peers; if the

student’s need for competence is thwarted, he or she may have a de-

sire to demonstrate physical superiority; finally, if a student feels iso-
lated from others, he or she may turn to aggressive behavior.
Conclusion Publications on school bullying keep rising in number, originating from

nearly all over the world. The reasons for this include high prevalence
of this destructive behavior in children and adolescents as well as the
harmful consequences of bullying on their psychological, physical,
and social wellbeing.
Bullying only occurs in specific social contexts where students ex-
perience strong negative feelings (anger, fear, frustration), which they
fuel into aggression towards weaker peers to maintain or increase
their status in a group.
School climate—or, rather, its components such as feeling safe at
school, the sense of belonging in school, and, most of all, social inter-
actions (teacher-student and peer relationships)—is a significant fac-
tor predicting bullying behavior.
The overview of studies allows us to identify which school climate
characteristics can be the factors that reduce the prevalence of bul-
lying. These include, first of all, positive teacher-student relationships,
which play a significant role in any grade, as compared to peer friend-
ships which only come to the fore as a factor of bullying prevention in
middle and high school. Conflictual relationships with teachers are as-
sociated with higher risk of victimization, especially for students who
do not enjoy popularity among their peers.
Perceived teacher support and inescapable and equal conse-
quences for anyone involved in inappropriate behavior (no teachers’
“pets”) are very strong predictors of bullying prevention.
Authority-based interventions and punitive responses are teach-
ers’ most preferred coping strategies today. Available research find-
ings demonstrate ineffectiveness of such measures against bullying,
as they only legitimize social violence and make perpetrators turn to
less identifiable and more sophisticated ways of bullying. Strategies
that suggest involvement of other adults including parents and individ-
ual work with bullies and victims have been found to be the most effi-
cient ones. Bullies should be taught to understand how harmful their
behavior is, what the victim feels, and how they can fix it. Victimized
children, in their turn, should be given help in finding a safe environ-
ment and a friendly social circle.
References Aldridge J. M., Mcchesney K., Afari E. (2018) Relationships between School Cli-
mate, Bullying and Delinquent Behaviours. Learning Environments Research,
vol. 21, no 2, pp. 153–172.
Alexandrov D., Ivaniushina V., Khodorenko D., Tenisheva K. (2018) Shkolnyj
klimat: konceptsija i instrument izmerenija [School Climate: Concept and
Measurement Tool]. Moscow: HSE.
Banzon-Librojo L. A., Garabiles M. R., Alampay L. Pp. (2017). Relations between

Harsh Discipline from Teachers, Perceived Teacher Support, and Bullying
Victimization among High School Students. Journal of Adolescence, vol. 57,
June, pp. 18–22.
Bjereld Y., Daneback K., Petzold M. (2017) Do Bullied Children Have Poor Re-
lationships with Their Parents and Teachers? A Cross-Sectional Study of
Swedish Children. Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 73, pp. 347–351.
Bochaver A., Khlomov K. (2014) Kiberbulling: travlya v prostranstve sovremen-
nykh tekhnologij [Cyberbullying: Harassment in the Space of Modern Tech-
nologies]. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, vol. 11, no 3,
pp. 177–191.
Bochaver A., Zhilinskaya A., Khlomov K. (2015) Shkolnaya travlya i pozitsiya
uchitelej [School Bullying and Teachers’ Attitudes]. Social Psychology and
Society, vol. 6, no 1, pp.103–113.
Boulton M. J., Boulton L., Down J., Sanders J., Craddock H. (2017) Perceived
Barriers that Prevent High School Students Seeking Help from Teachers for
Bullying and their Effects on Disclosure Intentions. Journal of Adolescence,
vol. 56, no 40, pp. 40–51.
Brown J. R., Aalsma M. C., Ott M. A. (2013) The Experiences of Parents Who Re-
port Youth Bullying Victimization to School Officials. Journal of Interperson-
al Violence, vol. 28, no 3, pp. 494–518.
Buhs E. S. (2005) Peer Rejection, Negative Peer Treatment, and School Adjust-
ment: Self-Concept and Classroom Engagement as Mediating Processes.
Journal of School Psychology, vol. 43, no 5, pp. 407–424.
Burger C., Strohmeier D., Spröber N., Bauman S., Rigby, K. (2015) How Teach-
ers Respond to School Bullying: An Examination of Self-Reported Interven-
tion Strategy Use, Moderator Effects, and Concurrent Use of Multiple Strat-
egies. Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 51, October, pp. 191–202.
Butovskaya M., Rusakova G. (2016) Bulling i bullery v sovremennoi rossiiskoi
shkole [Bullying and Bullies in Today’s Russian School]. Etnograficheskoe
obozrenie, no 2, pp. 99–115.
Butovskaya M., Lutsenko O., Tkachuk K. (2012) Bulling kak sociokulturnyj
fenomen i ego svyaz s chertami lichnosti u mladshikh shkolnikov [Bullying
as a Sociocultural Phenomenon and Its Relation to Personality Traits among
Younger School Children]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie, no 5, pp. 139–150.
Chirkina T., Khavenson T. (2017) Shkolnyy klimat: Istoriya ponyatiya, podkhody
k opredeleniyu i izmerenie v anketakh PISA [School Climate: The History of
the Concept, Approaches to Defining, and Measurement in PISA Question-
naire]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 1, pp. 207–
229. DOI: 10.17323/1814–9545–2017–1–207–229
Eliot M., Cornell D., Gregory A., Fan X. (2010) Supportive School Climate and
Student Willingness to Seek Help for Bullying and Threats of Violence. Jour-
nal of School Psychology, vol. 48, no 6, pp. 533–553.
Farrington D. P., Ttofi M. M. (2009) School-Based Programs to Reduce Bully-
ing and Victimization. Available at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/
grants/229377.pdf (accessed 10 April 2019).
Fedunina N. Ju. (2014) Psihologicheskij klimat v shkole: k voprosu o strukture
ponjatija [Psychological school climate: on the structure of the notion]. Jour-
nal of Modern Foreign Psychology, no 1, pp. 117–124.
Fedunina N. Ju., Sugizaki Je. (2012) Nasilie v shkole. Osmyslenie problemy v
zarubezhnyh istochnikah [Violence in school. Foreign sources comprehen-
sion]. Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, vol 1, no 3, pp. 71–85.
Ford R., KingT., Priest N., Kavanagh A. (2017). Bullying and Mental Health and
Suicidal Behaviour among 14-To 15-Year-Olds in A Representative Sam-
ple Of Australian Children. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry,
vol. 51, no 9, pp. 897–908.

Gage N. A., Prykanowski D. A., Larsson A. (2014). School Climate and Bullying
Victimization: A Latent Class Growth Model Analysis. School Psychology
Quarterly, vol. 29, no 3, pp. 256–271.
Gladden R. M., Vivolo-Kantor A. M., Hamburger M. E., Lumpkin C. D. (2014). Bul-
lying Surveillance among Youths: Uniform Definitions for Public Health and
Recommended Data Elements, Version 1.0. Atlanta, GA: National Center for
Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
and U. S. Department of Education.
Guerra N. G., Williams K. R., Sadek S. (2011) Understanding Bullying and Victim-
ization during Childhood and Adolescence: a Mixed Methods Study. Child
Development, vol. 82, no 1, pp. 295–310.
Hein V., Koka A., Hagger M. S. (2015). Relationships Between Perceived Teach-
ers’ Controlling Behaviour, Psychological Need Thwarting, Anger and Bul-
lying Behaviour in High-School Students. Journal of Adolescence, no 42,
pp. 103–114.
Hunter S. C., Boyle J. M., Warden D. (2004) Help Seeking amongst Child and Ad-
olescent Victims of Peer‐Aggression and Bullying: The Influence of School‐
Stage, Gender, Victimisation, Appraisal, and Emotion. British Journal of Ed-
ucational Psychology, vol. 74, no 3, pp. 375–390.
Kochenderfer-Ladd B., Pelletier M. E. (2008) Teachers’ Views and Beliefs about
Bullying: Influences on Classroom Management Strategies and Students’
Coping with Peer Victimization. Journal of School Psychology, vol. 46, no 4.
pp. 431–453.
Konishi C., Miyazaki Y., Hymel S., Waterhouse T. (2017). Investigating Associ-
ations between School Climate and Bullying in Secondary Schools: Multi-
level Contextual Effects Modeling. School Psychology International, vol. 38,
no 3, pp. 240–263.
Koth C. W., Bradshaw C. pp., Leaf pp. J. (2008) A Multilevel Study of Predictors
of Student Perceptions of School Climate: The Effect of Classroom-Level
Factors. Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 100, no 1, pp. 96–104.
Ladd G. W., Kochenderfer-Ladd B. (2002) Identifying Victims of Peer Aggres-
sion from Early to Middle Childhood: Analysis of Cross-Informant Data for
Concordance, Estimation of Relational Adjustment, Prevalence of Victimi-
zation, and Characteristics of Identified Victims. Psychological Assessment,
vol. 14, no 1, pp. 74.
Låftman S. B., Östberg vol., Modin B. (2017) School Climate and Exposure to
Bullying: a Multilevel Study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,
vol. 28, no 1, pp. 153–164.
Lardier Jr D. T., Barrios V. R., Garcia-Reid pp., Reid R. J. (2016). Suicidal Ide-
ation among Suburban Adolescents: the Influence of School Bullying and
Other Mediating Risk Factors. Journal of Child & Adolescent Mental Health,
vol. 28, no 3, pp. 213–231.
Lister C. E., Merrill R. M., Vance D. L., West J. H., Hall P. C., Crookston B. T.
(2015) Victimization among Peruvian Adolescents: Insights into Men-tal/
Emotional Health from the Young Lives Study. Journal of School Health,
vol. 85, no 7, pp. 433–440.
Longobardi, C., Iotti, N. O., Jungert, T., & Settanni, M. (2018). Student-Teach-
er Relationships and Bullying: the Role of Student Social Status. Journal of
Adolescence, vol. 63, February, pp. 1–10.
Ma X. (2002) Bullying in Middle School: Individual and School Characteristics
of Victims and Offenders. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,
vol. 13, no 1, pp. 63–89.
MacLeod I. R. (2007) A Study of Administrative Policy Responses to Bullying In
Illinois Secondary Schools. Chicago: Loyola University.
Mishna F., Scarcello I., Pepler D., Wiener, J. (2005) Teachers’ Understanding of
Bullying. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l’éducation,

vol. 28, no 4, pp. 718–738.
Mucherah, W., Finch, H., White, T., Thomas, K. (2018) The Relationship of School
Climate, Teacher Defending and Friends on Students’ Perceptions of Bul-
lying In High School. Journal of Adolescence, vol. 62, January, pp. 128–139.
Nakamoto J., Schwartz D. (2010) Is Peer Victimization Associated with Academ-
ic Achievement? A Meta‐Analytic Review. Social Development, vol. 19, no 2,
pp. 221–242.
Newman R. S. (2008). Adaptive and Nonadaptive Help Seeking with Peer Har-
assment: an Integrative Perspective of Coping and Self-Regulation. Educa-
tional Psychologist. vol. 43. no 1. pp. 1–15.
Oldenburg B., van Duijn M., Sentse M., Huitsing G., van der Ploeg, R., Salmival-
li C., Veenstra R. (2015) Teacher Characteristics and Peer Victimization in
Elementary Schools: A Classroom-Level Perspective. Journal of Abnormal
Child Psychology. vol. 43. no. pp. 33–44.
Olweus D. (2013) Victimization by Peers: Antecedents and Long-Term Outcomes.
Social Withdrawal, Inhibition, and Shyness in Childhood (eds K. H. Rubin,
J. B. Asendorf), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 315–341.
Pinskaya М., Kosaretsky S., Froumin I. (2011) Shkoly, effektivno rabotayushchie
v slozhnykh sotsialnykh kontekstakh [Effective Schools in Complex Social
Contexts]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 4, pp.
148–177. DOI: 10.17323/1814–9545–2011–4–148–177
Rey Alamillo R. D., Ortega Ruiz R. (2008) Bullying en Los Países Pobres: Preva-
lencia y Coexistencia con Otras Formas de Violencia. International Journal
of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, vol. 8, no 1, pp. 39–50.
Rigby K. (2017) How Australian Parents of Bullied and Non-Bullied Children See
Their School Responding to Bullying. Available at: https://www.ncab.org.
au/media/2535/parent-paper-educational-review.pdf (accessed 10 April
2019).
Saarento S., Salmivalli C. (2015) The Role of Classroom Peer Ecology and By-
standers’ Responses in Bullying. Child Development Perspectives, vol. 9,
no 4, pp. 201–205.
Safronova M. V (2014) Bulling v obrazovatel’noj srede-mify i real’nost’ [Bullying
in Educational Environment—Myths and Reality]. The World of Science, Cul-
ture and Education, no 3, pp. 182–185.
Salmivalli C., Poskiparta, E., Ahtola A, Haataja, A. (2013) The Implementa-tion
and Effectiveness of the KiVa Antibullying Program in Finland. European Psy-
chologist, vol. 18, no 2, pp. 79–88.
Serdiouk M., Berry D., Gest S. D. (2016) Teacher-Child Relationships and Friend-
ships and Peer Victimization across the School Year. Journal of Applied De-
velopmental Psychology, vol. 46, September, pp. 63–72.
Sobkin V. S., Smyslova M. M. (2012) Zhertvy shkolnoij travli: vlijanie socialnykh
faktorov [Victims of School Bullying: Influence of Social Factors]. Issues of
Educational Sociology, vol. XVI, no XXVIII, pp. 130–136.
Swearer S. M., Hymel S. (2017) Understanding the Psychology of Bullying: Mov-
ing toward a Social-Ecological Diathesis–Stress Model. American Psycholo-
gist, vol. 70, no 4, pp. 344–353.
Troop-Gordon W., Ladd G. W. (2015) Teachers’ Victimization-Related Beliefs and
Strategies: Associations with Students’ Aggressive Behavior and Peer Vic-
timization. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, vol. 43, no 1, pp. 45–60.
Ttofi M. M., Farrington D. pp. (2011) Effectiveness of School-Based Programs to
Reduce Bullying: a Systematic and Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of Exper-
imental Criminology, vol. 7, no 1, pp. 27–56.
Underwood M. K. (2003) Social Aggression among Girls. New York, London:
Guilford.

Vishnevskaia V., Butovskaya M. (2010) Fenomen shkolnoj travli: agressory

i zhertvy v rossijskoj shkole [The Phenomenon of School Bullying: Aggres-
sors and Victims in Russian School]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie, no 2, pp.
55–68.
Whitney I., Smith pp. K. (1993). A Survey of the Nature and Extent of Bullying In
Junior/Middle and Secondary Schools. Educational Research, vol. 35, no 1,
pp. 3–25.
Yeager D. S., Fong C. J., Lee H. Y. Espelage D. L. (2015) Declines in Efficacy of
Anti-Bullying Programs among Older Adolescents: Theory and a Three-Lev-
el Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, vol. 37,
March–April, pp. 36–51.
Zych I., Farrington D., Llorent J., Ttofi M. M. (2017) Protecting Children against
Bullying and Its Consequences. London: Macmillan.
Engineering and Economics
Graduates: Between Supply
and Demand
Received in Elena Varshavskaya exiting the labor force upon reaching

September 2018 Doctor of Sciences in Economics, Pro- the age of retirement during that peri-
fessor, Human Resource Management, od. While aggregate supply of engineer-
School of Business Administration, Fac- ing workforce was growing during the
ulty of Business and Management, Na- post-reform era, demand for their labor
tional Research University Higher School was shrinking―mostly due to a consid-
of Economics. Email: evarshavskaya@ erable decline in engineering jobs.
hse.ru It has been established that chanc-
Elena Kotyrlo es of getting a job, average time that it
Doctor of Sciences in Economics, As- takes to find one, and the degree of first-
sociate Professor, Department of Ap- job educational and skill match are pret-
plied Economics, Faculty of Economic ty much the same for young qualified en-
Sciences, National Research Universi- gineers and economists. No statistically
ty Higher School of Economics. Email: significant difference has been observed
ekotyrlo@hse.ru between their starting salaries, either.
Therefore, no evidence has been found
Address: 20 Myasnitskaya St, 101000
to support the hypothesis about a high
unmet demand for qualified engineers
Abstract. Microdata from the National and oversupply of workforce in econom-
Employment Survey of 2010–2015 Vo- ics and management. The study demon-
cational and University Graduates con- strates that the reported shortage of en-
ducted by the Russian Federal State gineers has nothing to do with low aggre-
Statistics Service (Rosstat) in April– gate supply in the industry.
September 2016 is used to analyze the Research findings could be used in
study-to-work transition of graduates in the design of academic programs for
engineering and economics. Transition higher education at national and region-
success is measured as indicator the ra- al scales.
tio of demand and supply of graduates’ Keywords: graduate labor market,
labor. Research methods include de- study-to-work transition, demand and
scriptive and regression analysis. supply of labor, engineering shortage,
Statistical analysis of macro data oversupply of economists.
shows that the number of skilled engi-
neers who obtained degrees in 1990–
2000 exceeded the number of engineers DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-98-128
Translated from Graduate employability has recently come under public scrutiny. Pol-
Russian by iticians, civil servants, employers, and experts often draw attention
I. Zhuchkova. to the gap between university graduates’ qualifications and the labor

Engineering and Economics Graduates: Between Supply and Demand
market demands. In particular, there is a prevailing opinion that de-

mand for engineering workforce is largely unmet in the Russian econ-
omy, yet universities keep producing economists, managers, lawyers,
and other “popular” occupations despite the obvious surplus of rele-
vant occupations1.
This standpoint is normally supported by higher education sta-
tistics. Indeed, total university enrollment was 4,399,500 as the aca-
demic year 2016/17 began, which is 1.6 higher than in the academic
year 1991/92 (2,762,800)2. While growing in volumes, student flows
underwent a considerable redistribution among majors and fields of
study. The post-reform years witnessed a steady increase in the pro-
portion of graduates in economics, law, social sciences, and human-
ities at the expense of qualified professionals in technology, peda-
gogy, and medicine [Varshavskaya 2016]. Only one in five graduates
(21.1%) in the 1991–1995 cohort had a degree in economics, but their
proportion amounted to one third (34.3%) in 2011–2015. To compare,
the share of engineering graduates was 28.0% in 1991–1995 and only
22.0% two decades later3.
There is one critical point that should be emphasized here. The es-
timates above and the resulting implications on the labor market im-
balance are almost entirely supply-centered. “An asymmetrical ap-
proach like that lacks analytical integrity and can hardly be called
unbiased. Chances are that implications for economic and education
policies drawn on its basis will in many cases be counterproductive.”
[Kapelyushnikov 2012:52] Obviously enough, labor demand should
also be considered to make any well-supported statements about oc-
cupational labor shortages or surpluses. However, while the volume
and structure of labor supply are quite easy to identify, evaluation of
labor demand is a much more challenging task that often requires
more data than available. As a consequence, the supply-demand ra-
tio is analyzed either at the macro-level [Korovkin 2011] or at the lev-
el of larger occupational categories [Kapelyushnikov 2012; Smirnov,
1 Debate over the shortage of engineering workers is not exclusive to Russia. In

the United States and Great Britain, STEM (Science, Technology, Engineer-
ing, and Mathematics) workforce shortages were first reported in the early
1950s, and the viewpoint has been quite popular among politicians and em-
ployers ever since. Meanwhile, a number of independent studies have found
STEM worker shortages in those countries to be exaggerated, at the very
least, or even absent [Lowell, Salzman 2007; Metcalf 2010; Salzman 2013;
Smith, Gorard 2011; Teitelbaum 2014; Xue, Larson 2015].
2 The highest total university enrollment (7,513,100 students) was observed at
the start of the academic year 2008/09.
3 The changes described here are part of more long-term trends. The percent-
age of degreed economists and managers in Russia has been growing con-
sistently since the early 1970s. The proportion of engineering graduates was
reducing most rapidly in the 1970s‑1990s, reaching a plateau in the early
2000s [Varshavskaya 2016].
Kapustin 2018]. Very few studies have approached the issue in the
context of different occupations and fields of study [Gimpelson et al.
2009; Stuken 2018]. Vladimir Gimpelson and his co-authors analyz-
ed the match between educational qualifications and current employ-
ment [Gimpelson et al. 2009]. Another example is Tatyana Stuken,
who examined the quality of graduate employment in Siberian Feder-
al District using employability indicators based on the educational and
occupational levels attained [Stuken 2018]. Both studies find no evi-
dence to support the hypothesis about unmet demand for skilled en-
gineers and labor surplus in economics and management.
Our goal is to analyze the study-to-work transition of graduates in
engineering and economics and use effectiveness of such transition
to estimate the supply-demand ratio. We assume that occupational
imbalance should be reflected in the way that graduates enter the la-
bor market, expecting that shortage of skilled workers (engineers in
this case) will make the transition easier, and surplus (of economists)
more difficult.
The article is structured as follows. In Section 1, we explore the
methodological ways of evaluating occupational shortages or sur-
pluses, which are then used to articulate our research approach and
hypotheses in Section 2. Data and research methods are described
in Section 3. Sections 4 and 5 present the results of data analysis and
hypothesis testing. Finally, the conclusion part presents research find-
ings.
1. Methodology of There are two most popular methodological approaches to identify-

Evaluating ing skills and occupational shortages. The so-called social demand
Occupational model determines that there is a shortage of members of a particu-
Shortages and lar profession if the actual number is less than the number dictated by
Surpluses some social, political, ideological, or any other non-economic criteri-
on or goal [Blank, Stigler 1957]. For example, one might use the crite-
rion that the country has not enough engineers to ensure national se-
curity, achieve leadership in innovative research, catch up with other
countries, etc. This approach has largely dominated the US and Brit-
ish discourse on STEM worker shortage for as long as 70 years (since
the mid‑20th century) [Smith 2017; Stevenson 2014].
The other approach, which is based on the labor supply and de-
mand theory and could be described as economic, determines short-
age as a situation where the quantity of the labor services in question
that is demanded is greater than the quantity supplied at the prevail-
ing wage. This definition, introduced in the classical paper by David
M. Blank and George J. Stigler [Blank, Stigler 1957], regards relative
wage rises as the criterion of shortage. Developing Blank and Stigler’s
ideas, Kenneth J. Arrow and William M. Capron proposed a model of
dynamic shortages, which accounts for the rate of changes in demand
in addition to wage response [Arrow, Capron 1959]. A dynamic short-

age results from rapid and consistent growth in demand for specific
skills or occupations, low labor supply elasticity, the long time it takes
for the market to adjust prices, and the specific features of some so-
cioeconomic institutions (e. g. vocational training and development).
The economic approach suggests that workforce shortage can only
be observed in situations where labor demand cannot be met with the
available supply at the existing market wage [Cedefop 2015; McGuin-
ness, Pouliakas, Redmond 2018; Shah, Burke 2005; Veneri 1999]. “In
a number of cases, the so-called shortage is not actually a shortage,
since it arises because the employer cannot pay the prevailing wage
for a certain skill.” [Meager 1986:240]
Supply-demand ratio is estimated using various indicators, which
can be grouped into two categories. The first one embraces economic
indicators reflecting the current labor market situation (usually across
specific skills or occupations). The most widely used ones include em-
ployment and unemployment rates, their dynamics, changes in rela-
tive wages, job vacancy statistics and how it correlates with unemploy-
ment [Barnow, Trutko, Piatak 2013; Cohen, Zaidi 2002; Shah, Burke
2005; Veneri 1999]. In certain cases, assessment may involve data on
average hours worked, labor market entry and exit, immigrant popu-
lation, employee training and conversion expenses, etc. [MAC2008;
Shah, Burke 2005]. The use of those indicators allows assessing the
supply-demand ratio at the macro level. The second group of indica-
tors is represented by data from employer surveys on skill and occu-
pational shortages, vacancies and vacancy filling rates, and issues
associated with recruiting workers of specific skills. These indicators
reflect the labor market situation at the micro-level, providing access
to information on hard-to-fill vacancies. Importantly, such indicators
do not always match the results of supply-demand ratio macro-as-
sessment [Gimpelson 2004; 2010; Cedefop 2015; Green, Machin,
Wilkinson 1998]. Researchers believe that shortage estimates based
on employer reports are often overstated, which should be consid-
ered when developing recommendations [Downs 2009; Meager 1986;
Shah, Burke 2005; Smith 2017]. The most widespread methods of oc-
cupational shortage/surplus assessment use a set of indicators re-
flecting the labor market situation and complement those with em-
ployer survey findings (e. g. [MAC2008; Veneri 1999]).
2. Research Occupational supply-demand imbalances affect how different oc-

Approach cupations are positioned in the labor market, in particular the entry
conditions for graduates. Indeed, if there is an excess supply of, say,
economists, graduates with economic degrees will face limited em-
ployment opportunities, consequently spend more time to find their
first job and have lower chances of being employed. Being up against
tough competition in the occupational labor market, graduates quali-
fied in “wrong” (surplus) occupations will have to accept lower-skilled
and/or mismatching jobs. Research has proved that graduates in an

imbalanced labor market are more likely to be overqualified for their
jobs [Croce, Ghignoni 2012; McGuinness, Pouliakas 2016; Verhaest,
van der Velden 2013; Verhaest, Sellami, van der Velden 2017; Wiel-
ing, Borghans 2001]. Job mismatch also becomes more likely to oc-
cur under such conditions [Frenette 2004; Ghignoni, Verashchagina
2014; Robert 2014; Wieling, Borghans 2001; Wolbers 2003]. Therefore,
a shortage of engineers and an excess supply of economists should
translate to higher effectiveness of study-to-work transition for en-
gineering graduates as compared to those with economics degrees.
We assessed labor market entry conditions using entry-level
job characteristics, namely first-job salary, qualifications-job (verti-
cal) mismatch, and major-job (horizontal) mismatch4. In addition, we
measured average job search time after graduation and the probabil-
ity of being employed.
The following hypotheses were proposed based on earlier findings.
Hypothesis 1. Average job search time is shorter for engineering
graduates than for economics graduates.
Hypothesis 2. Employment is higher among engineers than among
economists.
Hypothesis 3. Engineering graduates are more likely to fill top
management positions and highly skilled jobs than economics grad-
uates.
Hypothesis 4. Engineering graduates are less likely to be mis-
matched to their jobs than economics graduates.
Hypothesis 5. Recent engineering graduates are paid higher than
recent graduates in economics.
If evidence is found to support these hypotheses, it will mean that
Russia’s labor market is experiencing a shortage of engineers and an
excess of economists; otherwise, we will find evidence to reject this
assumption.
3. Data and Method Data from the Federal Employment Survey of Vocational and Univer-
sity Graduates was used as empirical framework for this study. This
sampling survey was conducted by the Russian Federal State Statis-
tics Service (Rosstat) in April–September 2016 as a supplementary
module for monthly workforce statistics. The survey covered around
36,000 vocational and university graduates produced in 2010–20155.
For the purpose of this study, we selected data on the respondents
with degrees in economics and engineering. Target groups were
4 We prefer analyzing graduates’ first jobs instead of their current employment

because first jobs are the ones that truly reflect the labor market entry con-
ditions.
5 For more information on the survey, visit http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/new_
site/population/trud/itog_trudoustr/index.html

shaped using the Russian National Classifier of Academic Subjects

OK 009–20036. Economics graduates included holders of degrees in
Economics and Management, and engineering graduates were those
with degrees in Engineering and Technology7. There were 7,040 econ-
omists (accounting for 34.3% of all university-educated respondents)
and 4,489 engineers (21.8%).
Variables reflecting differences in graduate employability (yi) in-
clude:
(1) First-job salary (logarithm);

(2) Qualifications-job match (binary variable: ‘1’ for top management
positions and highly skilled jobs, ‘0’ for all the other cases);
(3) First-job educational match (binary variable: ‘1’ for being matched
to one’s job, ‘0’ for being mismatched);
(4) Probability of being employed at the moment of the survey―for
graduates produced more than a year ago;
(5) Average job search time after graduation.
We applied a log-linear model (extended Mincer equation) to wag-

es, Cox regression to average job search time, and linear probability
model to the other dependent variables. The latter choice is explained
by the need to compare assessments by a number of specifications.
Coefficients in a linear probability model are represented by estimat-
ed marginal effects on the probability, which facilitates analysis and
comparison considerably. Besides, the quality of probability models
is sensitive to the normality assumption of regression errors―a rath-
er rigorous requirement that very few real-world models comply with
[Ai, Norton 2003].
The following variables were used as independent:
(1) Personal characteristics: gender, age, marital status (Z2);

(2) Human capital characteristics: years of work experience, mode of
study (full-time/part-time/extramural), type of funding (govern-
ment-/self-funded), region of study (region of residence / other
region / abroad)8 (Z3);
(3) First-job characteristics: sector (formal/informal), industry,
job-education match (Z4);
(4) Local labor market characteristics: type of locality (urban/rural),
region of residence, industrial structure of the region (shares of
6 This version of the Classifier was in force at the moment of the survey, so we
used it instead of the more recent one (OK 009–2016).
7 Engineering-related majors are described in much more detail than majors
within economics in both versions of the Classifier.
8 Preliminary data analysis also took account of the form of university owner-
ship (private/public), but the variable was later omitted from the model to
avoid multicollinearity.
mining, process manufacturing, power production, and housing

in the GRP above the median value and the third quartile) (Z5).
Every indicator of study-to-work transition effectiveness was assessed

using five sets of regressors. The first specification only included one
binary variable (Ingener: ‘1’ for Engineering and Technology, ‘0’ for
Economics and Management) to discriminate between engineers and
economists, and fixed regional effects. Next, four sets of explanato-
ry variables described above were added consecutively, both alone
and multiplied by the binary “engineer/economist” variable. As a re-
sult, differences in labor market entry patterns between economists
and engineers were identified by the binary variable as well as by the
inhomogeneity of personal, human capital, first-job, and local labor
market characteristics. Models were estimated on different subsam-
ples. The basic subsample included respondents who had searched
for a job after graduation, as those graduates had actually been en-
tering the labor market.
The model can thus be represented as follows:
yi = β0 + β1 Ingeneri + Ingeneri ∑β j
2j Zi2 + … + Ingeneri ∑β 5j Zi5 +
+ Territi + εi,
where sets of regression coefficients b are determined by selecting

one of the specifications mentioned above with a corresponding set
of variables Zi, and dependent variable yi is one of the indicators of
successful employment. Region-specific fixed effects are included in
every specification.
4. Engineering and Our first step will be to discuss the general trends in supply and de-
Economics Gradu- mand of engineers and economists.
ates in the Labor A survey of workforce demonstrates that holders of degrees in
Market engineering and technology are more numerous in younger age co-
4.1. Macroeconomic horts (Fig. 1). For example, there are 1.5 times more engineers among
Context workers aged 25–34 than among those aged 55–64, who are exiting
the labor market. The gap increases to 2.2 times when only econom-
ically active population is concerned, which shapes aggregate labor
supply. This data provides no reason to argue that universities have
been producing fewer qualified engineers lately, thus creating a short-
age of engineering workforce. Population with degrees in economics
has also been growing, its proportion being four times higher among
25–34-year-olds than among those aged 55–64. For economically
active population, the gap reaches 6.5 times.
Labor demand is assessed using statistics on employment by in-
dustry, salaries, and job vacancy rates. Obviously, demand for engi-
neering talent is largely formed by the secondary sector, first of all the
manufacturing, construction, transport, and communications indus-

Figure . Population with Degrees in Engineering and Economics by

Age Cohorts, 2016 (1,000 people)
Degrees in Engineering Degrees in Economics
1,800 1,000 people

1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
Economically
Active Population 400
Economically
Inactive 200
Population 0 Age
Cohorts,
40–44
60–64
40–44
60–64
30–34
50–54
30–34
50–54
65–72
65–72
25–29
35–39
55–59
25–29
35–39
55–59
45–49
45–49
Years
tries―they are estimated to account for about two thirds of all jobs
that require engineering skills. Demand for economists and managers
is more diversified, being generated not only by enterprises but also
by businesses, business and social services companies, and pub-
lic administration organizations. Three quarters of jobs that require
higher education in economics are concentrated in the service sec-
tor. Although amendments to the industrial classifiers make dynam-
ics assessment difficult, the major trends are obvious. The number
of workers employed in the secondary sector, including skilled jobs,
was consistently decreasing during the post-reform period, while em-
ployment in the service sector was growing, especially in business, fi-
nance, and public administration. The total number of workers em-
ployed in the secondary sector decreased by nearly 10 million during
the 1990s‑2010s. Within the same period, employment increased by
over 8 million in the sales and food service industries, by 2 million in
public administration, and by 900,000 in finance. In addition, small
business development also contributed to the growing demand for
economists. It is thus not unreasonable to assume that aggregate de-
mand for engineers was decreasing in the post-reform years, in con-
trast with aggregate demand for economists and managers which was
increasing.
Supply and demand factors include changes in relative wages.
According to Rosstat statistics, the rise in wages in 2005–2015 was
on average 2–3% higher for engineers than for holders of degrees in
economics, which was probably a “compensation” for the accelerat-
ed increase in economist remunerations of the 1990s. Such wage dy-
Table 1. Sociodemographic Characteristics

of Economics and Engineering Graduates
(%)
Economics and Engineering

Management and Technology
Gender
Male 23,3 74,2
Female 76,7 25,8
Marital status
Married 52,8 45,9
Single 47,2 54,1
Mode of study
Full-time 55,8 69,9
Part-time 10,3 8,5
Extramural 33,8 21,5
Type of funding
Government-funded 29,6 54,1
Self-funded 70,4 45,9
Combining work and study
Constantly 37,9 30,1
From time to time 13,9 18,2
Never 48,2 51,7
Note. Hereinafter, indicators are shown in bold, the difference

between which is significant at the 95% confidence level.
namics provides no basis for reporting a significant unmet demand for

engineers. The same is indicated by job vacancy statistics. Accord-
ing to Rosstat figures, the job vacancy rates in 2008–2016 were 2.2–
3.0% for most engineering occupations and 1.5–2.2% for econom-
ics-related ones.
Therefore, the intermediate conclusion based on statistical data
analysis is that workforce supply was growing in both engineering and
economics during the 1990s‑2010s, being more intensive in the lat-
ter field. However, aggregate demand for engineers was not increas-
ing, to say the least, or probably was even shrinking, while aggregate
demand for economists was growing, perhaps slightly falling behind
workforce supply in the industry. That is the macroeconomic context
in which graduate survey data will further be analyzed.

4.2. Graduate Males account for only one quarter of economics graduates and fe-
Characteristics9 males for only one quarter of engineering graduates (Table 1). Such
gender imbalance reflects the existing attitudes about male- and fe-
male-dominated jobs. The respondents are on average 28.2 years old,
and nearly half of them are married.
Engineering graduates were more likely than economists to have
obtained their higher education degrees as government-sponsored
full-time students. Regardless of the mode of study, economists had
to pay for education more often than engineers. Over half (54.7%) of
the full-time economics graduates had been self-funded students,
as compared to only one third (32.9%) of the engineering graduates.
Among the extramural graduates, 91.8% of the economists and 78.0%
of the engineers had had their studies financed by the government.
Combining work and study is typical of both occupations, every
other graduate having done it constantly or from time to time. Half of
the economists and nearly 58% of the engineers who combined work
and study had part-time jobs related to their major.
4.3. Labor Market Two thirds of the graduates searched for a job after graduation. The
Entry proportions of jobseekers are equal among economists and engineers
(62.6% and 63.8%, respectively). Former full-time students were
much more likely to search for a job (83.2% of the economists and
78.1% of the engineers) than their extramural counterparts (34.8%
and 28.7%, respectively). The reasons for not seeking a job are the
same for both occupations, yet there is a great difference between
the modes of study. Nearly the only reason why extramural graduates
did not search for a job was because they stayed with same employer
they had been working for during their studies. This option was select-
ed by 82.2% of the economists and 81.5% of the engineers. Former
full-time students had a more varied list of reasons, though keeping
the “old” job was the top choice here, too (24.5% and 26.8%, respec-
tively). Among economics graduates from full-time programs, 22.6%
referred to family reasons, 9.5% to having received a job offer, and
8.5% to having had no need to work. The reasons specified by former
full-time students in engineering included being called up for military
service (13.4%), receiving a job offer (12.9%), and being assigned to
a job by distribution (12.5%). A closer analysis showed that differenc-
es in the reasons for not seeking a job among full-time graduates are
mostly explained by the gender profiles of the two occupations.
Median length of job search was three months for economics
graduates and two for degreed engineers; 30.8% of the former and
38.1% of the latter found their first jobs within one month after gradu-
ation. In general, engineering graduates tend to get employed soon-
9 In this section, data is given on all 2010–2015 graduates in relevant occupa-

tions.
Figure . Percentage of Respondents Who Did

Not Land a Job after Graduation
70 %
60
50
40
Economics and Management
30
Engineering and Technology
20
10
0 Average job search

<1 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 time, months
er than holders of degrees in economics (Fig. 2). No essential gender

gaps have been observed.
The overwhelming majority of graduates‑90.0% of the economists
and 93.0% of the engineers—got employed after graduation. Employ-
ment rates are very close for women (89.5% in economics and 88.7%
in engineering) and slightly differing for men (91.5% and 94.5%, re-
spectively).
Lack of experience was reported by three quarters of the econ-
omists and two thirds of the engineers as number one problem that
graduates faced when seeking a job, followed by low salaries, unavail-
ability of suitable jobs, and impossibility to find an education-matching
career (Table 2). No critical differences were found between the two
occupations. Unavailability of suitable jobs was reported somewhat
more often by engineers. The problem of finding an education-match-
ing career was experienced more often by the gender groups under-
represented in a given occupation, i. e. male economists and female
engineers.
No difficulties getting the first employment were experienced by
16.5% of engineering graduates and 12.5% of economics degree
holders. This is true to the same extent for men and women within
each of the two occupations (16.9% of male engineers and 15.3% of
female engineers; 12.2% of male economists and 12.6% of female
economists). Yet, full-time graduates reported having no such difficul-
ties three times more often than their extramural counterparts, namely
17.0% vs. 6.2% in economics and 20.6 vs. 6.4% in engineering.

Table 2. Challenges Faced by Graduate Jobseekers (%)
Economics and Engineering and

Management Technology
Total Males Females Total Males Females
Lack of experience 74.6 70.4 76.0 67.2 64.7 74.0
Low salaries offered 41.2 42.0 40.9 41.7 43.7 36.4
No suitable jobs available 30.7 32.1 30.2 35.4 36.0 33.9
Impossible to find an education-

20.9 24.6 19.6 22.1 20.9 25.1
matching career
Unqualified for jobs 5.7 4.6 6.2 6.3 5.9 7.2
Discrimination (by gender, ethnicity,

1.7 0.9 2.0 0.8 0.1 2.7
parental status, etc.)
Failed pre-employment assessment

(testing computer skills, foreign 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.1 1.2 0.9
language skills, etc.)
Limited abilities due to health

0.4 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.7 0.5
conditions
Other 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.4
N, persons 3,392 878 2,514 2,003 1,446 557
4.4. First Job Top management positions and highly skilled jobs are held by 59.7%
Characteristics of graduates in economics and 57.4% of those in engineering (Ta-
ble 3). Otherwise speaking, the proportion of workers with skills well-
matched to their jobs is virtually the same in both groups. At the same
time, downward mobility is much higher among engineers than among
economists. Nearly one in five degreed engineers (18.6%) is employed
as an unskilled worker, which is three times higher than the rate for de-
greed economists (6.2%).
About two thirds of the graduates in both occupations reported
being matched to their first jobs. For female graduates, education-job
match differs little between the occupations, but this is not the case
for male graduates. Only half (52.0%) of the economists felt that their
first jobs were matching their major, which is almost one third lower
than the proportion among the engineers.
First-job salaries of economics graduates are 20% lower than
5. Transition from those of their engineering counterparts (22,900 vs. 28,500 rubles),
Study to Work: Is men being paid on average higher than women.
There a Difference
Between Engineer-
ing and Economics In accordance with the hypotheses formulated above, regression
Graduates? models were estimated for log wage, probability of major-job match,
Table 3. First-Job Employment Characteristics (%)
Economics and Engineering and

Management Technology
Total Males Females Total Males Females
Career
Top managers 8.8 13.8 7.2 8.1 8.8 5.7
Highly skilled professionals 50.9 40.2 54.2 49.3 47.9 53.7
Medium-skilled professionals 13.3 13.7 13.2 12.4 12.9 10.9
Public servants 6.4 2.4 7.7 2.7 0.9 8.3
Service and sales workers 14.1 13.8 14.2 8.4 7.0 12.8
Skilled agricultural workers 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.2
Skilled workers 2.2 6.4 0.9 9.9 11.8 4.1
Operators, assembly fitters, drivers 2.2 5.9 1.0 6.3 7.2 3.4
Unskilled workers 1.8 3.6 1.3 2.4 2.8 1.1
Relationship between education and job
Match (Yes, Rather yes) 62.6 52.0 65.9 67.0 68.4 62.9
Mismatch (No, Rather no) 37.4 48.0 34.1 33.0 31.6 37.1
Wage
Mean, thousand rubles 22.9 26.5 21.9 28.5 30.0 23.3
Median, thousand rubles 20.0 25.0 20.0 25.0 28.0 20.0
qualifications-job match, average job search time, and probability of

being employed. Table 4 presents the results of testing each hypothe-
sis by consecutively adding the sets of variables specified in Section 3.
The table only contains parameter values of the “engineer/economist”
variable, their significance levels, sample size, and explained variance,
or the coefficient of determination. Reports with complete sets of ex-
planatory variables for every dependent variable can be found in the
Appendix.
5.1. Wages The results of assessing an extended Mincer equation with the list-
ed sets of factors added consecutively show that wages of engineers
are significantly higher than those of economists only in the models
with fixed regional effects (Table 4). However, when personal, human
capital, first job, and local labor market characteristics are controlled
for, it turns out that engineering graduates are not paid higher than
holders of degrees in economics; in fact, they are paid even lower, al-
though the gap is not significant in most specifications. Assessment
of the regression models with complete sets of variables reveals that

Table 4. Parameter Values of the “Engineer/Economist” Binary Variable
Regional fixed Personal Human capital First job Local labor

effects characteristics characteristics characteris- market character-
included added added tics added istics added
Dependent Variable (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
LN(wage) 0.194*** –0.195* –0.177 –0.282 –0.247

(0.013) (0.107) (0.121) (0.183) (0.186)
N of observations 3,939 3,939 3,939 3,939 3,939
R-squared 0.336 0.379 0.404 0.424 0.430
Major-job match 0.047*** –0.050 –0.009 0.022 –0.017

(0.013) (0.113) (0.129) (0.148) (0.150)
R-squared 0.053 0.063 0.098 0.182 0.187
Qualifications-job match 0.014 0.178 0.190 0.170 0.187

(0.014) (0.114) (0.129) (0.149) (0.151)
R-squared 0.054 0.056 0.108 0.359 0.361
Probability of being employed 0.015** 0.015 0.098 –0.006 0.001

(0.007) (0.069) (0.078) (0.080) (0.079)
R-squared 0.067 0.075 0.161 0.269 0.271
Average job search time 0.113*** 0.100 0.395* –0.007 –0.056

(0.023) (0.191) (0.224) (0.233) (0.240)
Pseudo R-squared 0.004 0.005 0.009 0.012 0.013
Standard errors in parentheses.

Significance: *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
wage levels are affected by graduates’ sociodemographic character-

istics, the mode of study, and the specific features of the local labor
market (Appendix, Column 1), whereas educational qualifications are
found to play a small role. Public administration is the only career field
where engineering graduates are paid higher than economists.
5.2. Education-Job Our findings do not support the hypothesis about significant differ-
Match ences in job-matching probability between engineers and economists
(Table 4; Appendix, Column 2). Industry of the first job and specific
aspects of regional economy are what matters for getting an educa-
tion-matching employment. Engineering graduates employed in sales
and public administration are mismatched to their jobs 27–31% and
18–22% more often, respectively, than economists in the same sec-

tors. Recent engineering graduates living in regions with high levels
of process manufacturing and power engineering activity have bet-
ter chances of matching their skills and qualifications to their jobs.
Female engineers are 10% less likely to be employed in their field of
study than female economists, the gap being even broader (14–15%)
for married women. Most probably, these findings reflect the existing
perception of engineering as a male-dominated field.
5.3. Qualifica- The probability of finding a qualifications-matching job is more or

tions-Job Match less the same for both engineers and economists (Table 4; Appen-
dix, Column 3). Young engineers matched horizontally are about 10%
more likely to be mismatched vertically at their first jobs than recent
economics graduates. It could be assumed that engineering gradu-
ates often start their careers from relatively low positions so as to rise
through the ranks as they gain experience. Such career trajectories
are primarily typical of enterprises with relatively high wage levels.
This finding is indirectly confirmed by the observation that engineers
employed in process manufacturing and power engineering are 24%
and 21% less likely, respectively, to be matched to their jobs vertical-
ly. Besides, when graduates fill major-matching jobs which do not re-
quire a university degree (for engineers, those are mostly unskilled
worker positions), it often means that the use of modern technolo-
gy requires a high level of professional skills while offering formally
low positions in the job hierarchy. Therefore, vertical educational mis-
matches do not always mean that demand for higher school knowl-
edge and skills is low.
5.4. Average Job Significant differences between engineers and economists in aver-
Search Time10 age time it takes to find a job are observed among those who looked
for (and found) employment in the formal economy (Table 4; Appen-
dix, Column 4). Engineers tend to spend 19% more time than econo-
mists seeking for a job in the formal sector, which may indicate a lim-
ited number of engineering jobs in the corporate world. This is not so
much about the lack of vacancies for recent engineering graduates;
rather, it means that graduates do not find the available jobs suitable,
in particular good-paying. Engineering graduates may also spend
more time searching for a job because they expect higher returns on
their education (in both absolute and relative terms) [Prakhov 2017]
and often find their competencies to be inadequate to new technolo-
gy requirements [Myagkov 2016].
10 Average job search time was modelled within a two-year period and was re-
stricted to two years for those who spent more time than that. We assume
that active job searching was suspended in two years and graduates quit the
labor market for some time.

5.5. Probability of No significant differences are observed in the probability of being em-
Being Employed11 ployed for economists and engineers (Table 4; Appendix, Column 5),
with the exception of engineers who combined work and study from
time to time―their chances of being employed were approximate-
ly 3% lower than those of economists with the same work-and-study
patterns.
As we can see, descriptive statistics and regression analysis re-
sults reveal no significant differences between engineering and eco-
nomics graduates in the probability of being employed and finding a
job matching their level of education and field of study. No significant
differences were found in average entry-level job salaries. That is to
say, labor market entry patterns are virtually the same for recent grad-
uates in both occupations.
6. Conclusion In contrast to widely held assumptions, the population of engineer-

ing graduates produced in the 1990s‑2000s exceeded the number
of professional engineers retiring from the labor force. As aggregate
supply of engineering workforce was growing during the post-reform
period, demand for engineers was shrinking, mostly due to a consid-
erable decline in secondary sector employment. Therefore, analysis of
macro statistical data casts doubt on the relevance of perceived en-
gineering skills shortage.
Neither does assessment of the study-to-work transition support
the commonly held belief that there is a shortage of engineering grad-
uates and a surplus of economists. Chances of finding a job, average
job search time, and vertical/horizontal educational mismatch statis-
tics are more or less the same for recent graduates in both occupa-
tions. Their starting salaries do not differ to a statistically significant
extent, either. In other words, there are no signs of supply-demand im-
balance in any of the two occupations. This conclusion is largely con-
sistent with the findings of other Russian researchers [Gimpelson et
al. 2009; Stuken 2018].
The problem of engineering workforce shortage, so persistent-
ly reported by employers, has little to do with low supply at the mac-
ro-level. Non-competitive wages, often inconsistent with engineering
graduates’ expectations, are one of the reasons for the skills shortage,
yet not the only one. This study did not take into account transaction
costs. It might be that special engineering skills, which are usually nar-
rower than competencies of economics graduates, face low demand
due to high mobility costs and unawareness of narrow career options
available in local labor markets.
The study results provide the basis for concluding that cutting gov-
ernment-funded university places for economists and increasing the
11 Probability of being employed was assessed for the respondents who had
graduated at least one year before the survey.
number of vacant places for engineering applicants will hardly im-

prove job filling for engineering positions. Increased accessibility of
engineering education may promote negative selection of engineers
and positive selection of economists. Making engineering degrees ac-
cessible to underprepared candidates will boost government spend-
ing on pre-employment training, which will not yield expected returns
in the future at either individual or national level. Universities face the
need to develop education models allowing for the structure and spe-
cific aspects of regional economy, coordinate educational activities
with employers on all fronts, and build a graduate employment mon-
itoring system reflecting graduates’ position in the labor market. An
important national goal is to create institutional conditions to encour-
age coordination and interaction among the labor market actors as
well as to provide them with adequate information.
References Ai C., Norton E. C. (2003) Interaction Terms in lLogit and Probit Models. Econom-
ics Letters, vol. 80, no 1, pp. 123–129. doi.10.1016/S0165–1765(03)00032–6
Arrow K. J., Capron W. (1959) Dynamic Shortages and Price Rises: The Engi-
neer-Scientist Case. Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 73, no 2, pp. 292–
308.
Barnow B. S., Trutko J. W., Piatak J. S. (2013) Occupational Labor Shortages:
Concepts, Causes, Consequences, and Cures. Kalamazoo, MI: W. E. Up-
john Institute for Employment Research.
Blank D. M., Stigler G. J. (1957) The Demand and Supply of Scientific Personnel.
Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Cedefop (2015) Skill Shortages and Gaps in European Enterprises: Striking a Bal-
ance between Vocational Education and Training and the Labour Market. Lux-
embourg: Publications Office. http://dx.doi.org/10.2801/042499.
Cohen M. S., Zaidi M. A. (2002) Global Skill Shortages. Northampton, MA: Ed-
ward Elgar.
Croce G., Ghignoni E. (2012) Demand and Supply of Skilled Labour and Overed-
ucation in Europe: A Country-Level Analysis. Comparative Economic Stud-
ies, vol. 54, no 2, pp. 413–439. doi: 10.1057/ces.2012.12.
Downs A. (2009) Identifying Shortage Occupations in the UK. Economic and
Labour Market Review, vol. 3, no 5, pp. 23–29. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/
elmr.2009.73.
Frenette M. (2004) The Overqualified Canadian Graduate: The Role of the Ac-
ademic Program in the Incidence, Persistence, and Economic Returns to
Overqualification. Economics of Education Review, vol. 23, no 1, pp. 29–45.
doi: 10.1016/S0272–7757(03)00043–8.
Ghignoni E., Verashchagina A. (2014) Educational Qualifications Mismatch in
Europe: Is It Demand or Supply Driven? Journal of Comparative Economics,
vol. 42, no 3, pp. 670–692. doi: 10.1016/j.jce.2013.06.006.
Gimpelson V. (2004) Defitsit kvalifikatsii i navykov na rynke truda: nedosta-
tok predlozheniya, ogranicheniya sprosa ili lozhnye signaly rabotodateley
[Shortage of Skills in the Labor Market: Limited Supply, Lack of Demand,
or False Signals from Employers?]. Issues of Economics, no 3, pp. 76–93.
Gimpelson V. (2010) Nuzhny li nashey promyshlennosti kvalifitsirovannye rabot-
niki? Istoriya poslednego desyatiletiya [Does the Russian Industry Need
Skilled Labour? Evidence from Recent History]. Economic Sociology, vol. 11,
no 4, pp.24–69.

Gimpelson V., Kapelyushnikov R., Karabchuk T., Ryzhikova Z., Bilyak T. (2009)
Vybor professii: chemu uchilis’ i gde prigodilis’ [Occupational Choice: What
We Learn and Where We Work]. HSE Economic Journal, no 2, pp. 172–216.
Green F., Machin S., Wilkinson D. (1998) The Meaning and Determinants of
Skills Shortages. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, vol. 60, no 2,
pp. 165–187.
Kapeliushnikov R. (2012) Spros i predlozhenie vysokokvalifitsirovannoy rabochey
sily v Rossii. Chast 1 [Demand and Supply of Skilled Labor in Russia: Who
Ran Faster? Part I]. Issues of Economics, no 2, pp. 52–66.
Korovkin A. (2011) Problemy soglasovaniya sprosa na rabochuyu silu i yeye pred-
lozheniya na rossiyskom rynke truda [The Problems of Matching Workforce
Demand and Supply in Russia’s Labor Market]. Studies on Russian Econom-
ic Development, no 2, pp. 103–123.
Lowell B. L., Salzman H. (2007) Into the Eye of the Storm: Assessing the Evi-
dence on Science and Engineering Education, Quality, and Workforce De-
mand. Research Report. Urban Institute. Available at: http://ssrn.com/ab-
stract=1034801 (accessed 20 April 2019).
MAC (2008) Skilled Shortage Sensible: The Recommended Shortage Occupa-
tion Lists for the UK and Scotland. Available at: www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.
uk/sitecontent/documents/aboutus/ workingwithus/mac/macreport2008
(accessed 20 April 2019).
McGuinness S., Pouliakas K. (2016) Deconstructing Theories of Overeducation
in Europe: A Wage Decomposition Approach. IZA Discussion Paper no 9698.
Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor. http://ftp.iza.org/dp9698.pdf
McGuinness S., Pouliakas K., Redmond P. (2018) Skills Mismatch: Concepts,
Measurement and Policy Approaches. Journal of Economic Surveys.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12254.
Meager N. (1986) Skill Shortages Again and the UK Economy. Industrial Rela-
tions Journal, vol. 17, no 3, pp. 236–248.
Metcalf H. (2010) Stuck in the Pipeline: A Critical Review of STEM Workforce Lit-
erature. InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies,
vol. 6, no 2. Available at: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6zf09176 (ac-
cessed 20 April 2019).
Myagkov A. (2016) Studenty tekhnicheskogo vuza: professionalnye kompetent-
sii i ozhidaniya na rynke truda [Technical University Students: Professional
Competences and Expectations on the Labour Market]. Sociological Stud-
ies, no 6, pp. 102–109.
Prakhov I. (2017) Determinanty ozhidaemoy otdachi ot vysshego obrazovaniya
v Moskve [Determinants of Expected Return on Higher Education in Mos-
cow]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 1, pp. 25–57.
doi: 10.17323/1814–9545–2017–1–25–57
Robert P. (2014) Job Mismatch in Early Career of Graduates under Post-Com-
munism. International Journal of Manpower, vol. 35, no 4, pp. 500–513.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM‑05–2013–0113.
Salzman H. (2013) What Shortages? The Real Evidence about the STEM Work-
force. Issues in Science and Technology, vol. 29, no 4, pp. 58–67. http://www.
jstor.org/stable/43315795.
Shah C., Burke G. (2005) Skill Shortages: Concepts, Measurement and Policy
Responses. Australian Bulletin of Labour, vol. 31, no 1, pp. 44–71.
Smirnov S., Kapustin A. (2018) Otsenka strukturnykh razryvov mezhdu sprosom
i predlozheniem na rynkakh truda regionov Rossijskoy Federatsii [Evaluation
of Structural Gaps Between Supply and Demand on the Labour Markets in
the Regions of the Russian Federation]. Voprosy statistiki, no 10, pp. 28–36.
Smith E., Gorard S. (2011) Is There a Shortage of Scientists? A Re-Analysis

of Supply for the UK. British Journal of Educational Studies, vol. 59, no 2,
pp. 159–177. doi: 10.1080/00071005.2011.578567
Smith E. (2017) Shortage or Surplus? A Long-Term Perspective on the Supply of
Scientists and Engineers in the USA and the UK. Review of Education, vol. 5,
no 2, pp. 171–199. doi: 10.1002/rev3.3091.
Stevenson H. J. (2014) Myths and Motives behind STEM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics) Education and the STEM-Worker Shortage
Narrartive. Issue in Teacher Education, vol. 23, no 1, pp. 133–146.
Stuken T. (2018) Kachestvo zanyatosti vypusknikov na regionalnykh rynkakh tru-
da [The Quality of Employment of Graduates on Regional Labour Markets].
Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. Series: Political, Sociological and
Economic Sciences, no 1, pp. 33–39. doi:10.21603/2078-8975-2018-1-33-39.
Teitelbaum M. S. (2014) Falling Behind? Boom, Bust, and the Global Race for Sci-
entific Talent. Princeton: Princeton University.
Xue Y., Larson R. C. (2015) STEM Crisis or STEM Surplus? Yes and Yes. Month-
ly Labor Review, vol. 138, no 5, pp. 1–13.
Varshavskaya E. (2016) Rossijskie rabotniki s vysshim obrazovaniem: analiz
obrazovatelnykh spetsialnostey [Russian Employees with Higher Educa-
tion: Analysis of Areas of Study]. Voprosy statistiki, no 9, pp. 31–39.
Veneri C. (1999) Can Occupational Labour Shortages Be Identified Using Avail-
able Data? Monthly Labor Review, vol. 122, no 3, pp. 15–21.
Verhaest D., van der Velden R. (2013) Cross-Country Differences in Graduate
Overeducation. European Sociological Review, vol. 29, no 3, pp. 642–653.
doi: 10.1093/esr/ jcs044.
Verhaest D., Sellami S., van der Velden R. (2017) Differences in Horizontal and
Vertical Mismatches across Countries and Fields of Study. International La-
bour Review, vol. 156, no 1, pp. 1–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1564–913X.2015.00031.x.
Wieling M., Borghans L. (2001) Discrepancies between Supply and Demand and
Adjustment Processes in the Labour Market. Labour, vol. 15, no 1, pp. 33–56.
doi: 10.1111/1467–9914.00154.
Wolbers M. H. (2003) Job Mismatches and Their Labour-Market Effects among
School-Leavers in Europe. European Sociological Review, vol. 19, no 3,
pp. 249–266. doi: 10.1093/esr/19.3.249

Appendix Regression Models with Complete Sets of Variables
Horizontal Vertical Average Probability

LN education- education- job search of being
Variable (wage) al match al match time employed
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Engineer –0.247 –0.017 0.187 –0.056 0.001

(base = economist) (0.186) (0.150) (0.151) (0.240) (0.079)
Age 0.006** –0.003 –0.0003 –0.024*** 0.003**

(0.003) (0.003) (0.002) (0.005) (0.002)
Female (base = male) –0.138*** 0.062** –0.019 0.067* –0.004

(0.025) (0.024) (0.021) (0.039) (0.012)
Female, married –0.068* 0.091** 0.008 –0.026 0.008

(0.037) (0.040) (0.036) (0.064) (0.021)
Married (base = single) 0.065** –0.035 0.001 0.072 0.020

(0.033) (0.036) (0.032) (0.057) (0.020)
Years of experience 0.029*** 0.028*** 0.016** 0.149*** 0.032***

(0.009) (0.008) (0.007) (0.022) (0.004)
Years of experience squared –0.002** –0.002*** –0.001* –0.010*** –0.003***

(0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.002) (0.001)
Mode of study: (base = full-time) –0.020 –0.044 0.019 –0.104* –0.046**

Part-time (0.039) (0.039) (0.033) (0.061) (0.022)
Extramural –0.072** –0.069** –0.052** –0.166*** –0.063***

(0.033) (0.032) (0.026) (0.053) (0.021)
Combining work and study (base = never): 0.062* –0.076** –0.046* –0.049 0.013
Constantly (0.035) (0.034) (0.027) (0.055) (0.018)
From time to time 0.025 –0.085*** –0.042** 0.0812** 0.036***

(0.024) (0.025) (0.021) (0.039) (0.012)
Region of studies (base = region of residence): 0.097*** –0.033 0.054** 0.032 –0.009
Other region (0.029) (0.029) (0.025) (0.043) (0.016)
Abroad –0.121* 0.136 –0.056 0.034 0.015

(0.065) (0.141) (0.105) (0.257) (0.069)
Type of funding –0.042** –0.058*** –0.021 –0.138*** 0.0003

(base = government-funded): self-funded (0.017) (0.018) (0.016) (0.030) (0.009)
Employment in the formal sector 0.036 0.113*** 0.0303 0.608*** 0.238***

(base = informal sector) (0.030) (0.025) (0.021) (0.046) (0.015)
Top manager, highly skilled professional 0.071***

(base = other groups) (0.023)
Industry (base = unspecified): 0.526*** 0.121

Agriculture (0.084) (0.090)
Mining 0.189* 0.410*** 0.128

(0.0108) (0.099) (0.099)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Process manufacturing 0.042 0.444*** 0.194**

(0.074) (0.059) (0.079)
Electricity generation and distribution 0.154 0.380*** 0.197**

(0.102) (0.086) (0.093)
Construction 0.124 0.501*** 0.146*

(0.082) (0.065) (0.082)
Sales, food service, hospitality 0.052 0.330*** –0.005

(0.073) (0.056) (0.077)
Transport and communications 0.055 0.420*** 0.026

(0.076) (0.061) (0.081)
Finance, real estate 0.061 0.542*** 0.132*

(0.073) (0.056) (0.078)
Public administration –0.089 0.535*** 0.216***

(0.074) (0.058) (0.079)
Education and healthcare –0.066 0.449*** 0.211***

(0.077) (0.062) (0.080)
Other –0.049 0.295*** 0.088

(0.090) (0.078) (0.094)
Matched to job 0.060*** 0.513***

(0.022) (0.017)
Share of mining in the GRP (base = below the 0.489*** –0.066 –0.056 –0.902*** –0.123
median): Above the median (0.140) (0.138) (0.117) (0.218) (0.110)
Above the 3rd quartile 0.172* 0.083 –0.082 0.244 0.110**

(0.097) (0.105) (0.101) (0.206) (0.055)
Share of process manufacturing in the GRP (base = 0.656*** –0.195* –0.136 0.407 0.218***
below the median): Above the median (0.111) (0.111) (0.115) (0.255) (0.069)
Above the 3rd quartile –0.012 –0.208*** –0.196*** 0.692*** 0.202***

(0.065) (0.061) (0.056) (0.176) (0.055)
Share of generated electricity in the GRP (base = 0.374*** –0.139* –0.174** 0.425** 0.211***
Above the 3rd quartile –0.086 –0.354*** –0.082 0.098 0.198***

(0.108) (0.086) (0.078) (0.191) (0.060)
Deliverable housing (sq.m/ruble GRP) (base = –0.545*** 0.056 –0.146 0.225 0.071
Below the median): Above the median (0.109) (0.109) (0.109) (0.203) (0.059)
Above the 3rd quartile –0.728*** 0.034 –0.043 0.270 0.078

(0.161) (0.136) (0.125) (0.253) (0.069)
Type of locality (base = urban): rural –0.033 –0.027 –0.007 –0.051 –0.024*
(0.022) (0.022) (0.019) (0.035) (0.014)
Engineers: benefit/losses
Age 0.008* 0.004 –0.004 –0.002 0.001

(0.005) (0.005) (0.005) (0.009) (0.003)

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Female (base = male) –0.003 –0.094** 0.049 –0.118* 0.011

(0.038) (0.038) (0.033) (0.064) (0.018)
Female, married –0.048 –0.147** 0.028 0.138 0.014

(0.059) (0.059) (0.054) (0.102) (0.029)
Married –0.021 0.073* –0.005 0.024 –0.007

(0.040) (0.043) (0.040) (0.071) (0.022)
Years of experience 0.011 –0.005 –0.008 –0.015 –0.001

(0.015) (0.013) (0.013) (0.039) (0.007)
Years of experience squared –0.001 0.0003 0.001 –0.0004 0.0004

(0.002) (0.001) (0.001) (0.005) (0.001)
Mode of study: (base = full-time) –0.082 –0.047 –0.006 0.062 0.0289

Part-time (0.066) (0.065) (0.056) (0.110) (0.034)
Extramural 0.029 –0.032 –0.060 –0.054 –0.036

(0.060) (0.060) (0.051) (0.103) (0.036)
Combining work and study (base = never): –0.014 0.009 –0.038 0.027 0.009
Constantly (0.065) (0.056) (0.046) (0.099) (0.028)
From time to time 0.033 0.067* 0.066** –0.125** –0.031*

(0.033) (0.035) (0.032) (0.060) (0.016)
Region of studies (base = region of residence): –0.047 0.062 –0.086** 0.178*** 0.023
Other region (0.043) (0.041) (0.038) (0.067) (0.022)
Abroad 0.040 –0.167 0.241* –0.179 0.028

(0.095) (0.195) (0.142) (0.339) (0.115)
Type of funding 0.030 0.067** 0.017 0.018 -0.016

(base = government-funded): self-funded (0.027) (0.027) (0.025) (0.046) (0.013)
Employment in the formal sector 0.001 –0.039 0.026 0.192** -0.007

(base = informal sector) (0.051) (0.040) (0.036) (0.079) (0.026)
Industry –0.135 –0.101

Agriculture (0.131) (0.137)
Mining 0.032 0.140 –0.243*

(0.156) (0.126) (0.137)
Process manufacturing 0.047 0.032 –0.134

(0.127) (0.091) (0.109)
Electricity generation and distribution –0.028 0.142 –0.220*

(0.147) (0.114) (0.124)
Construction 0.082 –0.056 –0.131

(0.132) (0.096) (0.112)
Sales, food service, hospitality 0.095 –0.308*** –0.140

(0.127) (0.090) (0.108
Transport and communications 0.104 –0.055 –0.124

(0.129) (0.094) (0.111)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Finance, real estate 0.085 –0.049 0.021

(0.127) (0.089) (0.109)
Public administration 0.236* –0.220** –0.091

(0.130) (0.095) (0.114)
Education and healthcare 0.031 –0.094 –0.088

(0.138) (0.100) (0.114)
Other 0.145 –0.124 –0.081

(0.168) (0.129) (0.139)
Matched to job 0.001 –0.098***

(0.033) (0.029)
Share of mining in the GRP (base = below the –0.051 0.018 0.051 0.086 –0.005
median): Above the median (0.034) (0.035) (0.033) (0.061) (0.017)
Above the 3rd quartile 0.049 –0.032 –0.017 0.046 0.019

(0.036) (0.034) (0.031) (0.059) (0.017)
Share of process manufacturing in the GRP (base = –0.035 0.023 0.010 0.070 –0.020
Above the 3rd quartile 0.028 0.078** 0.022 0.022 –0.022

(0.030) (0.031) (0.028) (0.053) (0.015)
Share of generated electricity in the GRP (base = –0.029 0.034 0.007 –0.035 –0.014
Above the 3rd quartile 0.046 0.063* –0.049 –0.135** –0.022

(0.033) (0.035) (0.032) (0.058) (0.017)
Deliverable housing (sq.m/ruble GRP) (base = –0.037 –0.069** –0.005 0.063 0.024
Below the median): Above the median (0.033) (0.032) (0.030) (0.057) (0.016)
Above the 3rd quartile 0.021 0.050 0.020 0.016 0.019

(0.037) (0.036) (0.033) (0.060) (0.017)
Type of locality –0.051 –0.022 –0.035 0.0793 0.016

(base = urban): rural (0.035) (0.034) (0.031) (0.054) (0.019)
R-squared 0.430 0.187 0.361 0.0126 0.271
Fixed regional effects are omitted in the report.

Robust standard errors in parentheses.
Significance level: *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1

The Modern Rector: Competencies Required
in the Global Academic Marketplace
Authors Pavel Zhdanov

Candidate of Science in Politics, Specialist of the Department of Analytics and
Monitoring of the State Autonomous Sociological Research Center. E-mail: zh-
danov@5top100.ru
Irina Trostyanskaya
Candidate of Science in Politics, Head of the Analytical Research Department
of the State Autonomous Sociological Research Center. E-mail: trostyanskaya@
sociocenter.info
Andrey Barsukov
Head of the Department of Analytics and Monitoring of the State Autonomous
Sociological Research Center. E-mail: barsukov@5top100.ru
Nadezhda Polikhina
Acting Director of the State Autonomous Sociological Research Center. E-mail:
polihina@sociocenter.info
Address: 50a/8, Zemlyanoy Val Str., Moscow, 109004, Russian Federation.
Abstract The article presents the results of studying the competencies of university lead-
ers, including those that ensure university effectiveness in the global academ-
ic marketplace. Rector appointment and selection procedures are analyzed
across countries. The study uses pre-collected data on careers of 93 universi-
ty leaders, of which 52 are in charge of Russia’s leading universities (including
21 Project 5–100 institutions) and 41 govern foreign universities ranked in the
top 100 of the QS World University Rankings® 2018. The following parameters
are analyzed as constituent parts of university leaders’ rectorship experience:
working abroad experience, business work experience as Head of Department
or higher, academic work experience including top management positions, sci-
entometric indicators, work experience in public service, age, years of teach-
ing and research experience, years of university leadership experience, years
of rectorship at another university. Significant differences have been revealed
in the competencies possessed by university leaders in Russia and abroad.
The rectors of top foreign universities have a more diverse experience in var-
ied fields necessary to ensure university effectiveness, and they also demon-
strate higher career mobility.
Keywords higher education institution rector, rectorship, global university governance

experience, university management competencies, management in educa-
tion, Project 5–100.
DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-129-158
References Abramov R. (2007) Menedzherializm: ekonomicheskaya ideologiya i uprav-

lencheskaya praktika [Managerialism: Economic Ideology and Managerial
Practice]. Economic Sociology, vol. 8, no 2, pp. 92–101.
Abramov R. (2011) Menedzherializm i akademicheskaya professiya. Konflikt
i vzaimodeystvie [Managerialism and the Academic Profession: Conflict and
Interplay]. Sociological Studies, no 7, pp. 37–47.
Adida B., Pereira O., De Marneffe O., Quisquater J. (2009) Electing a Universi-
ty President Using Open-Audit Voting: Analysis of Real-World Use of Helios.
EVT/WOTE’09 Proceedings of the Conference on Electronic Voting Tech-
nology/Workshop on Trustworthy Elections (Montreal, Canada, August 10–
11, 2009), Berkeley, CA: USENIX Association, p. 10.
Altbach Ph. G., Salmi J. (eds) (2012) Doroga k akademicheskomu sovershen-
stvu: stanovlenie issledovatelskikh universitetov mirovogo klassa [The Road
to Academic Excellence. The Making of World-Class Research Universities].
Moscow: Ves Mir.
Andreev A. (2009) Rossiyskie universitety XVIII—pervoy poloviny XIX v. v kon-tek-
ste universitetskoy istorii Evropy [Russian Universities of the 18th–First Half
of the 19th Century in the Context of the History of the University in Europe].
Moscow: Znak.
Arystanbekova A. (2008) Ekonomika, osnovannaya na znaniyakh [Knowl-
edge-Based Economy]. World Economy and International Relations, no 6,
pp. 30–33.
Berezhnaya J., Gurtov V. (2009) Dinamika raspredeleniya vozrastnykh kategoriy
rukovoditeley vuzov [Dynamics of Age Categories Distribution of Heads
of Higher Educational Institutions]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, no 12,
pp. 86–90.
Bolman L. (2010) Research Using or Influenced by Bolman & Deal’s Four Frames.
Available at: http://www.leebolman.com/four_frame_research.htm (ac-
cessed 10 April 2019).
Bolman L., Deal T. (1990) Leadership Orientations (Self). Brookline, MA: Lead-
ership Frameworks.
Clark B. R. (2011) Sozdanie predprinimatelskikh universitetov: organizatsionnye
napravleniya transformatsii [Creating Entrepreneurial universities: Organi-
zational Pathways of Transformation]. Moscow: HSE.
Clark B. R. (2011) Sistema vysshego obrazovaniya: akademicheskaya organizat-
siya v kross-natsionalnoy perspective [The Higher Education System: Aca-
demic Organization in Cross-National Perspective]. Moscow: HSE.
Cook C. E. (2008) Study Abroad for Chinese University Presidents: How China
is Reforming Higher Education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning,
vol. 40, no 3, pp. 32–39.
Crow M. M., Dabars W. B. (2017) Model novogo amerikanskogo universiteta [De-
signing the New American University]. Moscow: HSE.
Dagaev A. (2008) Ekonomika znaniy v informatsionnom obshchestve [Knowl-
edge Economy and the Information Society: Ten Years Later]. Information
Society, no 5–6, pp. 40–42.
Deem R. (2004) “Novy menedzherializm” i vysshee obrazovanie: upravlenie
kachestvom i produktivnostyu raboty v universitetakh Velikobritanii [‘New
Managerialism’ and Higher Education: The Management of Performances
and Cultures in Universities in the United Kingdom]. Voprosy obrazovaniya /
Educational Studies Moscow, no 3, pp. 44–56.
Deem R., Ozga J. (1996) Coping with Crises and Changing Engendered Cul-
tures: Feminist Academic Managers in UK Higher Education. Paper present-
ed at the Society for Research into Higher Education Conference “Working
in Higher Education” (Cardiff, December 1996).
Deem R., Ozga J. (2004) Women Managing for Diversity in a Post Modern World.
Feminist Critical Policy Analysis: A Perspective from Post Secondary Educa-
tion (ed. C. Marshall), London; New York: Falmer, pp. 25–40.
De Ridder-Symoens H. (ed.) (1992) A History of the University in Europe. Vol. I.
Universities in the Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Pavel Zhdanov, Irina Trostyanskaya, Andrey Barsukov, Nadezhda Polikhina
The Modern Rector
De Ridder-Symoens H. (ed.) (1996) A History of the University in Europe. Vol. II.

Universities in Early Modern Europe (1500–1800). Cambridge: Cambridge
University.
Filippov V. (1998) Sravnitelny analiz sistem upravleniya v vuzakh, organizatsii
i ekonomiki obrazovaniya [Comparative Analysis of University Governance
Systems, Organization and Economics of Education]. University Manage-
ment: Practice and Analysis, no 1, pp. 28–37.
Froumin I. (2017) Pochemu eta kniga budet interesna rossiyskomu chitatelyu.
Predislovie k knige M. Krou i U. Debarsa “Model novogo amerikanskogo uni-
versiteta” [Why This Book Is Going to Be of Interest to the Russian Reader.
A Foreword to Designing the New American University by Michael M. Crow
and William B. Dabars]. Moscow: HSE.
Galazhinsky E. (2017) Vostrebovannye kompetentsii rukovoditeley universitetov:
mirovye trendy vs rossiyskie protsessy v obrazovanii [In-Demand Compe-
tencies of University Leaders: Global Trends vs Russian Practices]. Univer-
sity Management: Practice and Analysis, vol. 21, no 2, pp. 6–8.
Grudzinsky A. (2004) Strategicheskoe upravlenie universitetom: ot plana k in-
novatsionnoy missii [Strategic Management of Universities: From Plan to
Innovative Mission]. University Management: Practice and Analysis, no 1,
pp. 9–20.
Havice P. A., Williams F. K. (2005) Achieving Balance: Lessons Learned from Uni-
versity and College Presidents. College Student Affairs Journal, vol. 24, no 2,
pp. 128–136.
Hodson J. B. (2010) Leading the Way: The Role of Presidents and Academic
Deans in Fundraising. New Directions for Higher Education, no 149, pp. 39–
49.
Hua H. A.N. (2002) President and Educator: Belief and Power of Management.
Journal of Higher Education, vol. 23, no 5, pp. 53–56.
Keller G. (1983) Academic Strategy: The Management Revolution in American
Higher Education. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University.
Kleyner G. (2005) Stanovlenie obshchestva znaniy v Rossii: sotsialno-ekonom-
icheskie aspekty [The Making of a Knowledge Society in Russia: Socioeco-
nomic Aspects]. Social Sciences and Contemporary World, no 3, pp. 56–69.
Konnov V., Repina M. (2015) Evolyutsiya modeley universitetskogo upravleni-
ya ot studium generale do “predprinimatelskogo universiteta” [Evolution of
University Management Models from “Studium generale” to “Entrepreneur-
ial University”]. International Trends, vol. 13, no 1, pp. 35–47.
Legon R., Lombardi J. V., Rhoades G. (2013) Leading the University: The Roles of
Trustees, Presidents, and Faculty. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learn-
ing, vol. 45, no 1, pp. 24–32.
Liu Xian-jun (2006) University President and Strategy—Several Problems Need-
ed to Be Studied in the University Strategy Administration of China. Journal
of Higher Education, no 6, pp. 1–7.
Mabel Tan, Fatt Hee Tie, Yan Piaw Chua (2014) Leadership Orientations of an
Educational Leader in a Private University in Malaysia. Procedia—Social and
Behavioral Sciences, no 114, pp. 681–686.
Maksakovsky V. (2012) Ekonomika znaniy [Knowledge Economy]. Smolensk: Uni-
versum.
Milner B. (2008) Upravlenie znaniyami v sovremennoy ekonomike [Knowledge
Management in Modern Economy]. Moscow: Institute of Economics, Rus-
sian Academy of Sciences.
Mikhaylova Ya. (2010) Formirovanie sistemy vysshego obrazovaniya SShA [The
Developing Factors of the USA Educational System]. Humanities Research
in the Russian Far East, no 1, pp. 95–99.
Monahan M. L., Shah A. J. (2011) Having the Right Tools: The Leadership Frames
of University Presidents. The Coastal Business Journal, vol. 10, no 1, pp. 14–
30.
Neumann A., Bensimon E. M. (1990) Constructing the Presidency: College Pres-
idents’ Images of Their Leadership Roles. A Comparative Study. The Journal
of Higher Education, vol. 61, no 6, pp. 678–701.
OECD (1996) The Knowledge-Based Economy. Paris: OECD.
Pravdina M., Gruzdev I., Terentyev Y., Stupnikova M. (2016) Funktsionirovanie
kollegialnykh upravlencheskikh organov s obshchestvennym uchastiem v
universitetakh zarubezhnykh stran [How Collegial Bodies with Public Partic-
ipation Operate in Foreign Universities]. Moscow: HSE.
Reznik S. (2009) Karyera rektora: kakoy ey byt? [Rectors Career: What Is It?].
University Management: Practice and Analysis, no 5, pp. 7–14.
Reznik S. D. (2012) Organizatsiya, planirovanie i samokontrol lichnoy deyatelnos-
ti rektora [Organization, Planning and Self-Control Control Rector’s Person-
al Activity]. University Management: Practice and Analysis, no 2, pp. 80–93.
Reznik S. (ed.) (2013) Rektory Rossii: sistema i mekhanizmy professionalnogo
stanovleniya [Rectors in Russia: The System and Mechanisms of Career De-
velopment]. Moscow: INFRA-M Engineering Research Center.
Reznik S. D., Fomin G. B. (2013) Organizatsiya deyatelnosti rektora vysshego
uchebnogo zavedeniya [Organisation of the University Rector’s Activity].
Bulletin of Kemerovo State University, vol. 1, no 1, pp. 279–283.
Rosser J. M. (1990) The Role of the University President in Realizing the Multi-
cultural University. American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 34, no 2, pp. 223–231.
Rüegg W. (ed.) (2004) A History of the University in Europe. Vol. III. Universities
in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries (1800–1945). Cambridge:
Cambridge University.
Rüegg W. (ed.) (2011) A History of the University in Europe. Vol. IV. Universities
Since 1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Slinker J. M. (1988) The Role of the College or University President in Institu-
tional Advancement. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizo-
na University.
Sullivan J. (2011) Global Leadership in Higher Education Administration: Perspec-
tives on Internationalization by University Presidents, Vice-Presidents and
Deans. Available at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/3370/ (accessed
10 April 2019).
Wissema J. G. (2016) Universitety tretyego pokoleniya: upravlenie universitetom v
perekhodny period [Towards the Third Generation University: Managing the
University in Transition]. Moscow: Olimp-biznes.
World Bank (2004) Sistema upravleniya v sektore vysshego obrazovaniya: srav-
nitelny analiz i vozmozhnye varianty strategii dlya Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Gov-
ernance in Higher Education: Comparative Analysis and Possible Strategies
for the Russian Federation]. Available at: http://www.psihdocs.ru/upravleni-
ya-v-sektore-visshego-obrazovaniya.html (accessed 10 April 2019).

Association Between
the Quality of Teacher-Child
Interaction and Language
Development
Aleksander Veraksa, Margarita Gavrilova,
Daria Bukhalenkova
Received in Aleksander Veraksa opment at preschool age is a powerful

October 2018 Corresponding Member of the Russian predictor of schooling outcomes.
Academy of Education, Professor, Doc- Research results are analyzed and sys-
tor of Sciences in Psychology, Head of tematized separately for three domains
the Psychology of Education and Peda- of the Classroom Assessment Scoring
gogics Department, Faculty of Psycholo- System (CL ASS™): instructional sup-
gy, Lomonosov Moscow State University. port, emotional support, and classroom
Еmail: veraksa@yandex.ru organization. We demonstrate which as-
Margarita Gavrilova pects of language development (phono-
Graduate Student, Faculty of Psycholo- logical awareness, vocabulary, sound-let-
gy, Lomonosov Moscow State University. ter knowledge) are affected more or less
Еmail: gavrilovamrg@gmail.com by classroom quality. The article presents
Daria Bukhalenkova the results of correlational and longitudi-
Junior Researcher, Psychology of Edu- nal studies. The high level of agreement
cation and Pedagogics Department, Fac- among their findings indicates effective-
ulty of Psychology, Lomonosov Moscow ness of the CL ASS™ as a method to as-
State University. Еmail: d.bukhalenkova sess classroom quality and the signifi-
@inbox.ru cant impact of classroom quality on lan-
guage development in the three domains
Address: Bld. 9, 11 Mokhovaya St, 125009
specified.
Keywords: preschool age, classroom
Abstract. The article presents a review quality, Classroom Assessment Scoring
aimed at studying the relationship between System (CL ASS), instructional support,
classroom quality and preschoolers’ lan- emotional support, classroom organiza-
guage development. Classroom quality is tion, language development, vocabulary,
understood as the quality of teacher-child phonological awareness, sound-letter
interactions in the kindergarten classroom. knowledge.
The rationale for this study is determined
by multiple findings that language devel- DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-159-178
The study was spon-

sored by grant No.17- Education quality enjoys the status of an independent field of research
29-09112\18 of the Rus- today [Burchinal et al. 2009; Peisner-Feinberg et al. 2001], and the
sian Foundation for
past decade has seen diversification of research problems within the
Basic Research.
Translated from field. A bunch of studies analyze the influence of teacher-child rela-
Russian by tionship on preschoolers’ cognitive, emotional, and social develop-
I. Zhuchkova. ment [Palermo et al. 2007]. Cross-disciplinary studies designed to
P RA C T I C E
identify the most efficient strategies of investing in education develop-

ment [Barnett 2008; Heckman 2006] are growing in number. What all
those research directions have in common is the focus on kindergar-
ten classroom quality as a critical factor of child development [Mash-
burn et al. 2008; Pianta, La Paro, Hamre 2008].
This article provides a review of studies on the association be-
tween classroom quality and language development of preschool chil-
dren. Our interest in language development is driven by its essential
role in the development of children’s cognitive abilities, emotional
self-regulation skills, and psychological readiness for school.
Classroom Modern studies discriminate between early childhood learning en-

Quality vironment and classroom quality. Learning environment is assessed
with easily measureable indicators, such as teacher-child ratio, avail-
ability of materials and facilities for children’s creative and play activi-
ties, accessibility of materials, teachers’ experience and professional
qualifications [NICHD Early Child Care Research Network 2005]. The
quality of learning environment is assessed in global research using
the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-R) [Harms,
Clifford, Cryer 2014]. This instrument measures some aspects of
classroom quality, too. However, the resulting assessment is com-
prehensive and normally does not provide a complete picture of kin-
dergarten classroom interactions.
Classroom quality is harder to evaluate because it is teacher-child
interactions that should be assessed. The existing characteristics of
classroom quality have descended from psychological theories of hu-
man development. John Bowlby’s theory of attachment [Bowlby 1969]
gave birth to the concept of dynamics of interpersonal relationships;
Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of ecological systems [Bronfenbrenner
1986] is where understanding of family as an aggregate of hierarchi-
cal subsystems has come from; Lev Vygotsky’s cultural-historical ap-
proach to development [Vygotsky 1980] provided evidence for the im-
portant role of communication in children’s mental development. The
most efficient instrument for observing those characteristics is the
Classroom Assessment Scoring System™ (CLASS™) [Pianta, La Paro,
Hamre 2008; Almazova, Bukhalenkova, Simonyan 2018].
This study focuses on classroom quality as a factor of language
development, since a number of publications testify that it plays a
guiding role [Justice, Piasta 2011; Vasilyeva, Waterfall 2011]. In par-
ticular, language development in early childhood is related to child’s
interactions with adults and peers in the kindergarten [Catts, Adlof,
Weismer 2006; Curby et al. 2009; Hu et al. 2016; NICHD Early Child
Care Research Network 2005, and others]. We expect that a review of
available studies will allow us to identify the components of early child-
hood classroom quality that affect preschoolers’ language develop-
ment the most. The main contribution of this study is that disaggregat-

Aleksander Veraksa, Margarita Gavrilova, Daria Bukhalenkova
Association Between the Quality of Teacher-Child Interaction and Language Development
ed findings in this field are analyzed and systematized in the Russian

language for the first time. Our review seeks to answer the following
research questions:
1. Is there agreement among the findings of the studies using the

CLASS™ instrument to assess classroom quality?
2. Does teacher-child interaction quality have a statistically signifi-
cant impact on preschool children’s language development?
3. Does this impact vary as a function of children’s socioeconomic
status and personal psychological characteristics?
Indicators of Language development is an umbrella term covering several men-

Language tal processes that a child needs to acquire oral and written language
Development skills. The National Early Literacy Panel’s report distinguishes between
phonological development, lexical development, syntactic/grammati-
cal development, and sound-letter knowledge as components of lan-
guage development [Lonigan, Shanahan 2009]. Phonological devel-
opment involves the ability to detect spoken language and individual
phonemes as well as to produce sounds and words using the articula-
tion skills acquired. Lexical development is assessed through the effec-
tiveness of learning the meaning of words (lexical units); it is expressed
as the size of a child’s vocabulary. Syntactic/grammatical develop-
ment is about learning the rules to combine words into sentences. Fi-
nally, sound-letter knowledge is the ability to associate sounds (letters)
with graphical symbols, which includes early reading and writing skills.
Similar classifications of language development milestones are
presented in Russian publications. Tatiana Akhutina and her col-
leagues suggest treating oral praxis as manifestation of articulation
development, rhythm and word repetition and oral speech compre-
hension as the outcome of phonological development, ability to name
objects and actions as an indicator of lexical development, and un-
derstanding and use of syntax as a measure of syntactic development
[Akhutina et al. 1996]. Lyubov Tsvetkova and Izabella Abeleva identi-
fy the sensorimotor, lexicogrammatical, and psychological levels of
language development [Abeleva 2012; Tsvetkova 2004]. The sensori-
motor level is responsible for auditory speech perception; the lexico-
grammatical level is where speech is processed (comprehension of
words and the structure of single utterances); and the psychological
level is that of written and oral speech comprehension.
This review will rely upon the typology used in the National Early Lit-
eracy Panel, as it fully matches the methodology of the studies ana-
lyzed [Lonigan, Shanahan 2009]. Those studies confine themselves
to exploring phonological awareness, vocabulary, and sound-letter
knowledge as aspects of language development, leaving out syntax―
probably because syntactic awareness and knowledge are hard to as-
sess in preschool children.
P RA C T I C E
Search Strategy The review covers studies on the relationship between classroom
quality and language development (phonological awareness, vocabu-
lary, and sound-letter knowledge) published between 2009 and 2018.
When selecting the publications, we considered the teacher-child
ratio in kindergarten classrooms (excluding the studies with three
and fewer students per teacher). The review does not include stud-
ies with sample groups smaller than 13 children. The electronic data-
bases Web of Science and eLibrary were used to search for full texts
of the articles. Of the 30 publications found, 25 satisfied the search
criteria specified above. The selected studies analyze children aged
3–7 years attending kindergartens in Australia, Great Britain, China,
Portugal, the United States, Finland, and Sweden.
Classroom Quality All the studies reviewed use the CLASS instrument to assess class-
Assessment room quality [Pianta, La Paro, Hamre 2008], as it works perfectly for
Methodology establishing the picture of teacher-child interactions in the kindergar-
ten. Our methodology takes cue from empirical findings that demon-
strate the crucial role of adult-child interactions throughout children’s
mental development [Downer, Sabol, Hamre 2010]. Data on class-
room interactions is collected using the method of structured obser-
vation in which an expert observes teachers instruct and communi-
cate with children in a few consecutive 20-minute observation cycles.
Within each cycle, the expert documents carefully the characteristics
of teacher-child and peer interactions across three domains: emotion-
al support, instructional support, and classroom organization.
The emotional support scale captures how teachers create an
emotionally safe environment, which implies establishing friendly (lit-
erally “warm”) and supportive relationships with children. Important
effects of emotional support on children include enjoyment in learn-
ing, comfort in the classroom, and appropriate levels of independence
in choosing activities and peers to interact with.
The instructional support scale is designed to evaluate the tools
that teachers use to develop cognitive and language skills in chil-
dren. It captures how teachers promote children’s thinking and en-
gage them in learning (diversity of learning materials and interaction
patterns). The score will be high if teachers regularly give challenging
tasks to children and encourage them to solve the tasks independent-
ly, supporting and extending their ideas. Teacher feedback quality is
an essential ingredient of preschool teaching: it must be personalized
and extensive, and stimulating generation of new ideas (not just being
the “correct-answer” type).
The classroom organization scale allows assessing the effective-
ness of instructional strategies and the quality of classroom organ-
ization. A high score is awarded if the teacher promotes self-regu-
lation skills in children, has clear and uncontroversial expectations
about their behavior, communicates the rules for group interaction in

a clear way, and fosters commitment to those rules in all kinds of sit-
uations.
Therefore, the CLASS enables experts observing kindergarten
classrooms in real life to evaluate comprehensively the quality of
classroom interactions. The three scales assess different aspects of
interactions, providing for differentiated analysis of classroom quality.
Language Develop- The phonological component of language development (phonolog-

ment Assessment ical awareness, oral language comprehension) was assessed using
Methodology the Test of Preschool Early Literacy [Lonigan et al. 2007], the Phono-
logical Awareness and Literacy Screening [Invernizzi et al. 2004], and
the phonological skills test methods proposed by Minna Torppa [Torp-
pa et al. 2007].
Children’s lexical development was evaluated using such tools as
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test [Dunn et al. 1965], Test de Vocabu-
lario Imagenes Peabody [Dunn et al. 1986], Chinese Version of the Pe-
abody Picture Vocabulary Test [Lu, Liu 2005], and Picture Vocabulary
Subtest of the Woodcock-Johnson [Woodcock et al. 2001]. The Oral
& Written Language Scale was used to test children’s oral expression
skills [Carrow-Woolfolk 1995].
Researchers made inferences about children’s ability to detect
and use sound/symbol correspondences by testing their knowledge
of letters and numbers with the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cog-
nitive Abilities [Woodcock et al. 2001] and the Tool for Assessing
Reading and Writing Skills [Lerkkanen, Poikkeus, Ketonen 2006] and
their understanding of the forms and functions of written language
with the Preschool Word and Print Awareness assessment [Justice,
Piasta 2011] and the Test of Preschool Early Literacy [Lonigan et al.
2007].
Correlational A meta-analysis of ten studies evaluating phonological develop-

Studies ment and letter-sound knowledge [Aikens et al. 2010; 2012; Bulot-
sky-Shearer et al. 2014; Burchinal et al. 2009; Curby, Brock, Hamre
2013; Dotterer et al. 2013; Peisner-Feinberg et al. 2008; Peisner-Fein-
berg, Schaaf, LaForett 2013; Weiland et al. 2013; West et al. 2010]
was conducted by Michal Perlman and his co-authors [Perlman et
al. 2016] to assess the relationship between classroom quality and
children’s mental development. The aggregate sample included over
7,000 children aged 4–6. The meta-analysis did not reveal any signifi-
cant relation between vocabulary size or letter knowledge and CLASS
indicators. Such results, however, could be explained by using an in-
efficient method of data analysis. In a methodological study, Christi-
na Weiland and her co-authors demonstrated low efficiency of using
correlational procedures to assess the association between preschool
quality and children’s developmental outcomes [Weiland et al. 2013].
P RA C T I C E
The sharp decline in the number of correlational studies in the field is

probably explained by the need to figure out which methods actual-
ly work.
Longitudinal An alternative to correlational analysis is longitudinal studies. Their

Studies design allows observing the development of children in kinder-
garten classrooms of different quality over a long period of time.
Bridget E. Hatfield regards longitudinal studies as a type of natural
experiment, in which classroom quality is the experimental condition
[Hatfield et al. 2016]. The longitudinal method makes it possible to
control for additional factors affecting language development (socio-
economic status, cultural and ethnic background, etc.) by measuring
the impact of classroom quality on language development. For this
purpose, researchers observe children twice, at the beginning and at
the end of a kindergarten year. Analysis of the differences between
the baseline and end-of-year assessment results provides for experi-
mental evaluation of the role of classroom characteristics in children’s
mental development. Below, we will focus on the longitudinal studies
analyzing language development characteristics as indicators of pre-
schoolers’ mental development.
A number of studies reveal a significant impact of instructional
support quality on sound-letter knowledge and vocabulary [Aikens
et al. 2010; Burchinal et al. 2009; 2010; Dotterer et al. 2013; Howes
et al. 2008; Mashburn et al. 2008]. It has been established that chil-
dren in classrooms offering a higher quality of instructional support
show significantly greater gains in vocabulary learning, oral expres-
sion, and letter knowledge. According to Andrew J. Mashburn, devel-
opmental effects depend largely on the quality of teacher-child inter-
actions, whereas curriculum, class size and teachers’ qualifications
have no significant influence on children’s development [Mashburn
et al. 2008:742].
Ying Guo and her colleagues found emotional and instruction-
al support to be statistically significant predictors of children’s print
awareness and vocabulary knowledge [Guo et al. 2010]. A few years
later, the research team conducted a study to examine how vocabu-
lary gains were affected by classroom quality and classroom age com-
position [Guo et al. 2014]. During a preschool year, children attend-
ed mixed-age and same-age classrooms of differing quality. Of all the
parameters analyzed, only classroom organization was found to have
a significant impact on vocabulary gains.
Some research groups have found emotional support quality to
have significant effects on the development of letter-sound knowl-
edge [Hamre, Pianta 2005; Pakarinen et al. 2017; Silinskas et al. 2017].
A Finnish research team led by Gintautas Silinskas revealed that Grade
1 reading outcomes are much better in classrooms in which teachers
show warmth and sensitivity, provide well-established routines, and

set clear expectations for student behavior [Silinskas et al. 2017:1].

The studies mentioned discover differences in how teacher-child in-
teraction quality affects language development as a function of chil-
dren’s individual characteristics. Bridget K. Hamre and Robert C. Pi-
anta demonstrate that positive effects are higher for children with
fewer socioeconomic resources as well as for those with behavio-
ral, communication, and cognitive problems. Eija Pakarinen and her
co-authors found positive effects of classroom interactions to be
stronger for children who initially had difficulties with language devel-
opment than for those who never experienced such problems.
A Chinese research team assessed kindergarten effectiveness by
examining the relationship between investment of financial resources
in early childhood education and student cognitive development [Hu
et al. 2016]. Of all the parameters analyzed, only teacher-child inter-
action quality was a significant factor of vocabulary development. The
effect of instructional support was most salient, followed by emotion-
al support and classroom organization.
As Hatfield and her colleagues found out, children in well-organ-
ized classrooms show significantly greater gains in print and phono-
logical awareness than those in poorly organized classrooms [Hatfield
et al. 2016]. However, classroom organization quality only has signifi-
cant impact on language development in classrooms with high levels
of emotional support.
Terri J. Sabol and her co-authors examined the influence of pre-
school classroom quality and children’s engagement in learning on
language development [Sabol, Bohlmann, Downer 2018]. Engage-
ment in learning was assessed as observed children’s individual en-
gagement with teachers and peers and their interest in learning ac-
tivities. Quality of instructional support and classroom organization
was found to influence the development of sound-letter knowledge.
The scholars emphasize that children’s positive engagement was a
more powerful predictor of language development than the indica-
tors of classroom quality. Their findings offer a new perspective for
classroom quality research as they provide evidence for the signifi-
cance of individual psychological characteristics of children as edu-
cational actors.
Discussion A meta-analysis of studies examining the association between class-

room quality and preschoolers’ language development conducted by
Perlman and his colleagues [Perlman et al. 2016] revealed no statis-
tically significant relations. Similar findings were obtained in anoth-
er meta-analysis [Cornelius-White 2007]. Longitudinal studies turned
out to be more informative. Table 1 combines the results of the re-
viewed studies that measure association between the CLASS and
preschool children’s phonological awareness, vocabulary, and let-
ter-sound knowledge.
P RA C T I C E
Table 1. Association Between the CLASS Measures and Components of Preschoolers’

Language Development
Author(s) N Age Language Development Assessment Methods ES IS CO
Aikens N. et al. 2010 3,315 3–4 years [PPVT-4; Dunn 2006] - Vocabulary +
[WJ-III; Woodcock 2001] - Letter-sound knowledge –
Guо Y. et al. 2010 328 3–5 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary + +
[PWPA; Justice 2001] - Letter-sound knowledge + +
[PALS; Internizzi 2004] - Phonological awareness + + –
Guo Y. et al. 2014 130 4–5 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary – – +
Burchinal M. et al. 2010 1,129 3–4 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary – +
[OWLS; Woolfolk 1995] - Phonological awareness – +
Letter knowledge - Letter-sound knowledge – +
Dotteter et al. 2012 3,584 3–5 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary – +
[OWLS; Woolfolk 1995] - Phonological awareness – –
[WJ-III; Woodcock 2001] - Letter-sound knowledge – +
Howes C. et al. 2008 2,8 3–4 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary – –
Mashburn J. et al. 2008 2,439 4–5 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary – +
[WJ-III; Woodcock 2001] - Letter-sound knowledge + –
Hamre B et al. 2005 919 5–6 years [PPVT-4; Dunn 2006] - Vocabulary + –
Hamre B et al. 2013 1,407 4–5 years [PPVT-4; Dunn 2006] - Vocabulary – –
[WJ-III; Woodcock 2001] - Letter-sound knowledge – –
Silinskas G. et al. 2017 1,029 5–7 years Reading of letters and words - Letter-sound knowl-
+ – +
edge
Pakarinen E. et al. 2017 515 6–7 years [Torppa 2007] - Phonological awareness + – +
Hu Y. et al. 2013 589 5–6 years [С-PPVT-R; Lu 2005] - Vocabulary + + +
Hartfield B. et al. 2015 875 3–4 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary –
[OWLS; Woolfolk 1995] - Phonological awareness + + –
[WJ-III; Woodcock 2001] - Letter-sound knowledge – – +
Burchinal M. et al. 2013 929 4–5 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary –
[OWLS; Woolfolk 1995] - Phonological awareness +
[WJ-III; Woodcock 2001] - Letter-sound knowledge +
Sabol T. et al. 2018 211 4–5 years [PPVT-III; Dunn 1997] - Vocabulary – + –
[WJ-III; Woodcock 2001] - Letter-sound knowledge – – –
[TOPEL; Lonigan 2007] - Phonological awareness – – –
Notes: (a) ES—Emotional Support; IS—Instructional Support; CO—Classroom Organization; (b) "+" denotes a significant pos-
itive relationship between the parameters; "–" denotes that no significant positive or negative relationship between the param-
eters is observed; (c) Empty cells denote that no data on relationship between the parameters is available.

Analysis of the studies listed above provides answers to the re-

search questions asked at the beginning of this review. The first ques-
tion concerned agreement among the findings of the studies examin-
ing how preschoolers’ language development is associated with the
classroom quality indicators assessed using the CLASS instrument.
There is obvious agreement in assessing the influence of instructional
support on different aspects of children’s language development, sta-
tistically significant effects being reported by most of the studies re-
viewed. However, salient discrepancies are observed in assessment
of the role of emotional support quality. We believe that differences
in the magnitude of association between emotional support and lan-
guage development across the sample may be related to the problem
of the “form and content” of communication. The emotional support
scale measures teachers’ ability to create an emotionally safe envi-
ronment in the first place, while the instructional support scale evalu-
ates the methods that teachers use to develop children’s vocabulary
and language skills. It can be thus concluded that instructional sup-
port quality does have a more significant impact on children’s lan-
guage development.
A lot of researchers exploring early childhood language develop-
ment ignore the factor of classroom organization quality. Yet, the few
studies that do consider this parameter testify to its high significance.
For instance, better-organized classrooms are associated with great-
er gains in vocabulary [Curby et al. 2009; Hu et al. 2016], phonologi-
cal awareness [Hu et al. 2016; Sabol, Bohlmann, Downer 2018], and
letter-sound knowledge [Pakarinen et al. 2017; Silinskas et al. 2017].
The classroom organization scale of the CLASS instrument evaluates
the methods that teachers use to foster children’s learning abilities,
engagement, and interest in learning. We suggest that including this
scale in research may help discover important relationships, since it
evaluates the teacher-child interactions that contribute to successful
acquisition of new language skills by students.
The second question was whether teacher-child interaction quality
has a statistically significant impact on preschool children’s language
development. A number of large-scale longitudinal studies show that
children in better-organized classrooms show significantly higher lan-
guage development gains in quite a range of aspects, such as vocab-
ulary [Aikens et al. 2010; Curby, Brock, Hamre 2013; Dotterer et al.
2013; Guo et al. 2010; Howes et al. 2008; Hu et al. 2016; Mashburn
et al. 2008; Pakarinen et al. 2017], ability to recognize and name let-
ters [Aikens et al. 2010; Burchinal et al. 2010; Hamre et al. 2013], oral
speech comprehension [Mashburn et al. 2008], and awareness of
written language [Guo et al. 2010; Hatfield et al. 2016].
We believe that greater language development gains in well-or-
ganized classrooms can be explained by teachers actively expanding
the zone of proximal development [Vygotsky 1980]. Probably, as a re-
sult of positive classroom interactions organized by the teacher (high
P RA C T I C E
scores on the emotional support scale), children feel safe, confident,

and enthusiastic about engaging in various tasks and conversations.
The teacher promotes children’s thinking and reasoning skills and cre-
ates situations that require classroom discussion (high scores on the
instructional support scale). Children in high-quality classrooms tend
to organize and express their own ideas on a regular basis, which is
observed much less often in classrooms offering low quality of instruc-
tional support.
Our third research question was whether the impact of classroom
quality on language development varies as a function of children’s so-
cioeconomic status and personal psychological characteristics. The
available research findings show that the effects vary depending on
children’s socioeconomic backgrounds and on whether they experi-
ence behavioral, cognitive or communication problems as they en-
ter kindergarten [Hamre et al. 2013; Sabol et al. 2018; Silinskas et
al. 2017]. Positive effects turn out to be significantly stronger for chil-
dren of lower socioeconomic status and those with behavioral, learn-
ing, and peer communication difficulties than for students outside
those categories. Therefore, the risks in child development mentioned
above can be mitigated by providing a high quality of teacher-child in-
teractions in the kindergarten classroom.
This review has some important limitations that should be taken
into account when using its results. First of all, it does not control for
age variability across kindergarten classrooms. Most studies focused
on the age of 4–5 years, but some samples included children aged
5–6. At different stages of child life, teacher-student interaction may
affect the same aspects of language development in different ways. In
addition, the review does not make allowance for region-specific cul-
tural differences due to the lack of data on cultural and ethnic back-
ground of study participants in the reports published.
Conclusion This review examines the results of studies on the association between
classroom quality and language development of preschool children.
A number of studies show that teacher-child interaction quality has a
considerable impact on children’s language development. For exam-
ple, students in classrooms offering high interaction quality tend to
have greater gains in vocabulary, letter knowledge, and oral speech
comprehension than children in lower-quality classrooms. Therefore,
it is not unreasonable to argue that high classroom quality is associ-
ated with greater children’s outcomes in each of the language devel-
opment aspects analyzed (phonological awareness, vocabulary, and
letter-sound knowledge).
A fairly high level of agreement among the study findings indicates
that the CLASS is a rather efficient instrument to obtain information
on teacher-child interaction quality in research on the association be-
tween classroom quality and preschoolers’ language development. It

thus offers a promising method that is consistent with the logic of the
cultural-historical theory and can be useful for studying classroom
quality on Russian samples. The method can also be used to develop
learning environment recommendations for kindergartens and pre-
school educational institutions.
References Abeleva I. (2012) Mekhanizmy kommunikativnoy rechi [Mechanisms of Commu-

nicative Speech]. Moscow: Paradigma.
Ahutina T., Maksimenko M., Polonskaya N., Pylaeva N., Yablokova L. (1996)
Metody nejropsikhologicheskogo obsledovaniya detej 5-6 let [Methods of
Neuropsychological Examination of Children 5-6 years]. Moscow Universi-
ty Psychology Bulletin, no 2, pp. 51–58.
Almazova O., Buhalenkova D., Simonyan M. (2018) Izuchenie obrazovatelnoy
sredy s pomoshchyu metodiki CL ASS: teoreticheskie osnovaniya i praktich-
eskie perspektivy [Educational Environment Evaluation by Means of CL ASS:
Theoretical Grounds and Practical Perspectives]. Sovremennoe doshkolnoe
obrazovanie, no 4, pp. 40–49.
Aikens N., Tarullo L., Hulsey L., Ross C., West J., Xue Y. (2010) A Year in Head
Start: Children, Families and Programs. ACF-ORPRE Report. Washington:
US Department of Health and Human Services,
Aikens N., Moiduddin E., Xue Y., Tarullo L., West J. (2012) Data Tables for Child
Outcomes and Classroom Quality in FACES 2009 Report. OPRE Report
2012-37b. Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families.
Barnett W.S. (2008) Preschool Education and Its Lasting Effects: Research and
Policy Implications. Boulder, CO: Education and Public Interest Center & Ed-
ucation Policy Research Unit.
Bowlby J. (1969) Attachment and Loss. Vol. I. Attachement. New York, NY: Ba-
sic Books.
Bronfenbrenner U. (1986) Ecology of the Family as a Context for Human Devel-
opment: Research Perspectives. Developmental Psychology, vol. 22, no 6,
pp. 723–742.
Bulotsky-Shearer R. J., Bell E. R., Carter T. M., Dietrich S. L. (2014) Peer Play In-
teractions and Learning for Low-Income Preschool Children: The Moderat-
ing Role of Classroom Quality. Early Education and Development, vol. 25,
no 6, pp. 815–840.
Burchinal P., Kainz K., Cai K., Tout K., Zaslow M., Martinez-Beck I., Rathgeb C.
(2009) Early Care and Education Quality and Child Outcomes. Washington,
DC: Child Trends.
Burchinal M., Vandergrift N., Pianta R., Mashburn A. (2010) Threshold Analysis
of Association between Child Care Quality and Child Outcomes for Low-In-
come Children in Pre-Kindergarten Programs. Early Childhood Research
Carrow-Woolfolk E. (1995) Oral and Written Language Scales. Circle Pines, MN:
American Guidance Service.
Catts H. W., Adlof S. M., Weismer S. E. (2006) Language Deficits in Poor Com-
prehenders: A Case for the Simple View of Reading. Journal of Speech, Lan-
guage, and Hearing Research, vol. 49, no 2, pp. 278–293.
Cornelius-White J. (2007) Learner-Centered Teacher-Student Relationships Are
Effective: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, vol. 77, no 1,
pp. 113–143.
Curby T.W., Brock L.L., Hamre B.K. (2013) Teachers’ Emotional Support Con-
sistency Predicts Children’s Achievement Gains and Social Skills. Early Ed-
ucation and Development, vol. 24, no 3, pp. 292–309.
P RA C T I C E
Curby T.W., LoCasale-Crouch J., Konold T.R., Pianta R.C., Howes C., Burchi-
nal M., Bryant D., Clifford R., Early D., Barbarin O. (2009) The Relations of
Observed Pre-K Classroom Quality Profiles to Children’s Achievement and
Social Competence. Early Education and Development, vol. 20, no 2, pp.
346–372.
Dotterer, A. M., Burchinal, M., Bryant, D., Early, D., & Pianta, R. C. (2013) Uni-
versal and Targeted Pre-Kindergarten Programmes: A Comparison of Class-
room Characteristics and Child Outcomes. Early Child Development and
Care, vol. 183, no 7, pp. 931–950.
Downer J., Sabol T.J., Hamre B. (2010) Teacher—Child Interactions in the Class-
room: Toward a Theory of Within and Cross-Domain Links to Children’s De-
velopmental Outcomes. Early Education and Development, vol. 21, no 5, pp.
699–723.
Dunn L.M., Padilla E.R., Lugo D.E., Dunn L.M. (1986) TVIP: Test de Vocabular-
io en Imágenes Peabody: Adaptación Hispanoamericana. Circle Pines, MN:
American Guidance Service.
Dunn L.M., Dunn L.M., Bulheller S., Häcker H. (1965) Peabody Picture Vocabu-
lary Test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Guo Y., Tompkins V., Justice L., Petscher Y. (2014) Classroom Age Composition
and Vocabulary Development among At-Risk Preschoolers. Early Education
and Development, vol. 25, no 7, pp. 1016–1034.
Guo Y., Piasta S.B., Justice L.M., Kaderavek J.N. (2010) Relations among Pre-
school Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, Classroom Quality, and Children’s Lan-
guage and Literacy Gains. Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 26, no 4,
pp. 1094–1103.
Hamre B., Hatfield B., Pianta R., Jamil F. (2014) Evidence for General and Do-
main‐Specific Elements of Teacher–Child Interactions: Associations with
Preschool Children’s Development. Child Development, vol. 85, no 3, pp.
1257–1274.
Hamre B.K., Pianta R.C., Downer J.T., DeCoster J., Mashburn A.J., Jones S.M.,
Brackett M.A. (2013) Teaching through Interactions: Testing a Developmen-
tal Framework of Teacher Effectiveness in over 4,000 Classrooms. The Ele-
mentary School Journal, vol. 113, no 4, pp. 461–487.
Hamre B.K., Pianta R.C. (2005) Can Instructional and Emotional Support in the
First‐Grade Classroom Make a Difference for Children at Risk of School Fail-
ure? Child Development, vol. 76, no 5, pp. 949–967.
Harms T., Clifford R.M., Cryer D. (2014) Early Childhood Environment Rating
Scale. New York: Teachers College.
Hatfield B.E., Burchinal M.R., Pianta R.C., Sideris J. (2016) Thresholds in the As-
sociation between Quality of Teacher–Child Interactions and Preschool Chil-
dren’s School Readiness Skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, vol. 36,
pp. 561–571.
Heckman J.J. (2006) Skill Formation and the Economics of Investing in Disad-
vantaged Children. Science, no 312(5782), pp. 1900–1902.
Howes C., Burchinal M., Pianta R., Bryant D., Early D., Clifford R., Barbarin O.
(2008) Ready to Learn? Children’s Pre-Academic Achievement in Pre-Kin-
dergarten Programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, vol. 23, no 1, pp.
27–50.
Hu B.Y., Mak M.C.K., Neitzel J., Li K., Fan X. (2016) Predictors of Chinese Ear-
ly Childhood Program Quality: Implications for Policies. Children and Youth
Services Review, vol. 70, September, pp. 152–162.
Invernizzi M., Sullivan A., Meier J., Swank L. (2004) Phonological Awareness
Literacy Screening for Preschool. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.
Justice L.M., Piasta S. (2011) Developing Children’s Print Knowledge through
Adult-Child Storybook Reading Interactions: Print Referencing as an Instruc-

tional Practice. Handbook of Early Literacy Research (eds S.B. Neuman, D.K.
Dickinson), New York: Guilford, vol. 3, pp. 200–213.
Lerkkanen M.K., Poikkeus A.M., Ketonen R. (2006) ARMI–Luku-ja Kirjoitustaidon
Arviointimateriaali 1. Luokalle. Helsinki: WSOY.
Lonigan C.J., Shanahan T. (2009) Developing Early Literacy: Report of the Na-
tional Early Literacy Panel. Executive Summary. A Scientific Synthesis of Ear-
ly Literacy Development and Implications for Intervention. Washington, DC:
National Institute for Literacy.
Lonigan C.J., Wagner R.K., Torgesen J.K., Rashotte C.A. (2007) TOPEL: Test of
Preschool Early Literacy. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Lu L., Liu H.H. (2005) Chinese Version of Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test–Re-
vised Manual. Taipei, Taiwan: Psychological Publishing Co Ltd.
Mashburn A.J., Pianta R.C., Hamre B.K., Downer J.T., Barbarin O.A., Bryant D.,
Howes C. (2008) Measures of Classroom Quality in Prekindergarten and
Children’s Development of Academic, Language, and Social Skills. Child
Development, vol. 79, no 3, pp. 732–749.
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (2005) Pathways to Reading: The
Role of Oral Language in the Transition to Reading. Developmental Psychol-
ogy, vol. 41, no 2, pp. 428–442.
Pakarinen E., Lerkkanen M.K., Poikkeus A.M., Rasku-Puttonen H., Eskelä-Haap-
anen S., Siekkinen M., Nurmi J.E. (2017) Associations among Teacher–Child
Interactions, Teacher Curriculum Emphases, and Reading Skills in Grade
1. Early Education and Development, vol. 28, no 7, pp. 858–879.
Palermo F., Hanish L.D., Martin C.L., Fabes R.A., Reiser M. (2007) Preschoolers’
Academic Readiness: What Role Does the Teacher–Child Relationship Play?
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, vol. 22, no 4, pp. 407–422.
Peisner-Feinberg E.S., Schaaf J.M. (2008) Evaluation of the North Carolina More
at Four Pre-Kindergarten Program: Performance and Progress in the Sev-
enth Year (2007–2008). Chapel Hill, NC: FPG Child Development Institute.
Peisner-Feinberg E., Schaaf J., LaForett D. (2013) Children’s Growth and Class-
room Experiences in Georgia’s Pre-K Program: Findings from the 2011-2012
Evaluation Study. Chapel Hill, NC: FPG Child Development Institute.
Peisner-Feinberg E.S., Burchinal M.R., Clifford R.M., Culkin M.L., Howes C., Ka-
gan S.L., Yazejian N. (2001) The Relation of Preschool Child Care Quality to
Children’s Cognitive and Social Developmental Trajectories through Second
Grade. Child Development, vol. 72, no 5, pp. 1534–1553.
Perlman M., Falenchuk O., Fletcher B., McMullen E., Beyene J., Shah P.S. (2016)
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of a Measure of Staff/Child Inter-
action Quality (The Classroom Assessment Scoring System) in Early Child-
hood Education and Care Settings and Child Outcomes. PloS one, no 11(12),
pp. 657–660.
Pianta R.C., La Paro K M., Hamre B.K. (2008) Classroom Assessment Scoring
System: Manual Pre-K. Baltimore, MD : Brookes.
Sabol T.J., Bohlmann N.L., Downer J.T. (2018) Low‐Income Ethnically Diverse
Children’s Engagement as a Predictor of School Readiness Above Pre-
school Classroom Quality. Child Development, vol. 89, no 2, pp. 556–576.
Silinskas G., Pakarinen E., Lerkkanen M.K., Poikkeus A.M., Nurmi J.E. (2017)
Classroom Interaction and Literacy Activities in Kindergarten: Longitudinal
Links to Grade 1 Readers at Risk and not at Risk of Reading Difficulties. Con-
temporary Educational Psychology, vol. 51, September, pp. 321–335.
The Family Life Project Key Investigators (2014) Thresholds in the Association be-
tween Child Care Quality and Child Outcomes in Rural Preschool Children.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, vol. 29, no 1, pp. 41–51.
P RA C T I C E
Torppa M., Tolvanen A., Poikkeus A.M., Eklund K., Lerkkanen M.K., Leskinen E.,
Lyytinen H. (2007) Reading Development Subtypes and their Early Charac-
teristics. Annals of Dyslexia, vol. 57, no 1, pp. 3–32.
Tsvetkova L. (2004) Neiropsikhologicheskaya reabilitatsiya bolnykh: rech i in-
tellektualnaya deyatelnost [Neuropsychological Rehabilitation of Patients:
Speech and Intellectual Activity]. Moscow: Russian Academy of Education.
Vasilyeva M., Waterfall H. (2011) Variability in Language Development: Relation
to Socioeconomic Status and Environmental Input. Handbook of Early Liter-
acy Research (eds S.B. Neuman, D.K. Dickinson), New York: Guilford, vol.
3, pp. 36–48.
Vygotsky L.S. (1980) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological
Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Weiland C., Ulvestad K., Sachs J., Yoshikawa H. (2013) Associations between
Classroom Quality and Children’s Vocabulary and Executive Function Skills
in an Urban Public Prekindergarten Program. Early Childhood Research
West J., Malone L., Hulsey L., Aikens N., Tarullo L. (2010) Head Start Children
Go to Kindergarten. ACF-OPRE Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Administra-
tion for Children & Families.
Woodcock R.W., Mather N., McGrew K.S., Schrank F.A. (2001) Woodcock-John-
son III Normative Update: Tests of Cognitive Abilities. Itasca, IL: Riverside.

To Include or Not to Include? Immigrant Children
Education as Perceived by the Teaching Community
in Sverdlovsk Region
Author Mikhail Vandyshev

Candidate of Sciences in Sociology, Associate Professor at the Department of
Applied Sociology, Ural Federal University. Address: 19 Mira Str., 620002 Ekat-
erinburg, Russian Federation. E-mail: m.n.vandyshev@urfu.ru
Abstract A survey of 160 school teachers was conducted in Sverdlovsk Region to find
out what teachers think about whether immigrant children should be includ-
ed or not, investigate the problems of inclusive and non-inclusive education
for immigrant children, and consider feasible support measures for teachers
dealing with this student category. As a social institution, the school responds
to growing cultural diversity of the host community, while at the same time sta-
bilizing it by reproducing certain sociocultural identities typical of the region
and the country as a whole.
There is no consensus in the teaching community regarding which policy
for immigrant children education should be preferred. About one third of the
respondents believe such children should not be included since they do not
speak the language of teaching (Russian). Meanwhile, 41 percent report that
inclusive education makes adaptation and integration easier for immigrant chil-
dren. Teachers interacting with immigrant children directly specify the problems
and challenges associated with the emergence of this new student category:
low learning preparedness, including poor knowledge of Russian; confronta-
tions between children with differing migrant backgrounds; conflicts between
immigrant and host community parents; difficulties of cultivating relations be-
tween teachers and immigrant parents; the precarious legal status of immi-
grants; and misunderstanding inflicted by differences in traditions, parenting
practices and cultural norms that affect behavior. Most respondents (76%) are
convinced that public education policy initiatives should prioritize enhancing
teachers’ professional competencies. Over half of the respondents find it nec-
essary to increase funding for immigrant children education as well as payment
for the teachers involved.
Keywords immigrant children, immigrant integration, inclusive education, multicultural

education, Sverdlovsk Region.
DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-179-198
References Alexandrov D., Baranova V., Ivaniushina V. (2012) Deti i roditeli —migranty vo
vzaimodeystvii s rossiyskoy shkoloy [Immigrant Children and Their Parents:
Interaction with the Russian School]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational
Studies Moscow, no 1, pp. 176–199. doi: 10.17323/1814-9545-2012-1-176-199.
Alexandrov D., Ivaniushina V., Kazartseva E. (2015) Etnicheskiy sostav shkol
i migratsionnyy status shkolnikov v Rossii [Ethnic Composition and Mi-
gration Status of Primary and Secondary School Students in Russia]. Vo-
10.17323/1814-9545-2015-2-173-195.
Avraamova E., Loginov D. (2016) Novye tendentsii v razvitii shkolnogo obra-
zovaniya. Po dannym ezhegodnogo monitoringovogo issledovaniya Tsentra
ekonomiki nepreryvnogo obrazovaniya RANKhiGS [New Trends in School
Education Development. Based on the Annual Monitoring Research Con-
P RA C T I C E
ducted by the Center of Economy of Continuous Education of the Presiden-

tial Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA)].
Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 4, pp. 163–185. doi:
10.17323/1814-9545-2016-4-163-185.
Barazgova E., Vandyshev M., Likhacheva L. (2010) Protivorechiya v formirovanii
sotsiokulturnoy identichnosti detey transgranichnykh migrantov [Sociocul-
tural Identity Formation Contradictions in the Transboundary Migrants’ Chil-
dren]. Izvestia. Ural Federal University Journal. Ser. 2. Humanities and Arts,
vol. 72, no 1, pp. 229–240.
Barwick C. (2018) Transnationalism and Intra-European Mobility among Eu-
rope’s Second Generation: Review and Research Agenda. Global Networks,
vol. 18, no 4, pp. 608–624.
Beck U. (2008) Kosmopoliticheskoe mirovozzrenie [Cosmopolitan Vision]. Mos-
cow: Center for Post-Industrial Studies.
Brown B. (2018) Unlikely Cosmopolitans: An Ethnographic Reflection on Migra-
tion and Belonging in Sri Lanka. Anthropological Quarterly, vol. 91, no 1,
pp. 209–236.
Collier P. (2016) Iskhod: kak migratsiya izmenyaet nash mir [Exodus: How Migra-
tion is Changing Our World]. Moscow: Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy.
Crul M. (2018) How Key Transitions Influence School and Labour Market Careers
of Descendants of Moroccan and Turkish Migrants in the Netherlands. Eu-
ropean Journal of Education, vol. 53, no 4, pp. 481–494.
Demintseva E., Zelenova D., Kosmidis E., Oparin D. (2017) Vozmozhnosti ad-
aptatsii detey migrantov v shkolakh Moskvy i Podmoskovya [Adaptation of
Migrant Children in the Schools of Moscow and the Moscow Region]. De-
mographic Review, vol. 4, no 4, pp. 80–109. https://doi.org/10.17323/dem-
review.v4i4.7529
Devine D. (2011) Immigration and Schooling in the Republic of Ireland: Making of
Difference? Manchester: Manchester University.
Dyatlov V. (ed.) (2009) Transgranichnye migratsii i prinimayushchee soobshchest-
vo: mekhanizmy i praktiki vzaimnoy adaptatsii [Transnational Migrations and
Host Communities: Mechanisms and Practices of Mutual Adaptation]. Eka-
terinburg: Ural State University.
Faist Th. (2000) The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Trans-
national Social Spaces. Oxford: Oxford University. doi:10.1093/acprof:
oso/9780198293910.001.0001.
Haepp T., Hsu M. (2019) Educational Inequalities between Children of Marriage
Migrants and Those of Local-Born Parents–Quantile Regression Results
from Taiwan. Applied Economics, vol. 51, no 5, pp. 465–487.
Krawatzek F., Sasse G. (2018) Integration and Identities: The Effects of Time, Mi-
grant Networks, and Political Crises on Germans in the United States. Com-
parative Studies in Society and History, vol. 60, no 4, pp. 1029–1065.
Li G. (2018) Divergent Paths, Same Destiny: A Bourdieusian Perspective on Ref-
ugee Families’ Negotiation of Urban School Transition in the US. European
Journal of Education, vol. 53, no 4, pp. 469–480.
Lunneblad J. (2017) Integration of Refugee Children and Their Families in the
Swedish Preschool: Strategies, Objectives and Standards. European Early
Childhood Education Research Journal, vol. 25, no 3, pp. 359–369.
Lunneblad J., Odenbring Y., Hellman A. (2017) A Strong Commitment: Conform-
ing a School Identity at One Compulsory Faith School in a Disadvantaged
Area. Ethnography and Education, vol. 12, no 1, pp. 112–126.
Malakhov V. (2015) Integratsiya immigrantov: Kontseptsii i praktiki [Immigrant In-
tegration: Theories and Practices]. Moscow: Liberal Mission Foundation.
Moscow Human Rights Commissioner (2018) Problemy zashchity prav detey,
ne imeyushchikh grazhdanstva Rossiyskoy Federatsii, v gorode Moskva.

Mikhail Vandyshev
To Include or Not to Include?
Otchet o nauchno-issledovatelskoy rabote [Issues of Safeguarding Chil-

dren with No Russian Citizenship in Moscow. Research Report]. Available
at: http://ombudsman.mos.ru/user/user/images/Дети%20(мигранты)%20
Макет%2Bобложка.pdf (accessed 10 April 2019).
Nesterova A. (2018) Deti, okhvachennye migratsionnymi protsessami: raznoo-
brazie, vyzovy i diversifikatsiya modeley podderzhki [Children in Migration
Processes: Diversity, Challenges, and Diversification of Models of Adapta-
tion]. The Journal of Social Policy Studies, vol. 16, no 4, pp. 645–660. doi:
10.17323/727-0634-2018-16-4-645-660.
OECD (2015) Young People with a Migrant Background // Indicators of Im-
migrant Integration 2015. Paris: OECD. Available at: http://www.oecd-ili-
brary.org/social-issues-migration-health/indicators-of-immigrant-integra-
tion‑2015-settling-in_9789264234024-en (accessed 10 April 2019).
Portes A., DeWind J. (eds) (2007) Rethinking Migration: New Theoretical and Em-
pirical Perspectives. New York: Berghahn Books.
Roohi S. (2019) Historicizing Mobility Trajectories of Highskilled Migrants from
Coastal Andhra to the United States. Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics,
vol. 31, no 1, pp. 24–41.
Sadownik A. (2018) Belonging and Participation at Stake. Polish Migrant Chil-
dren about (Mis)Recognition of Their Needs in Norwegian ECECs. Europe-
an Early Childhood Education Research Journal, vol. 26, no 6, pp. 956–971.
Shelomentsev A. (ed.) (2017) Regionalnye osobennosti mezhdunarodnoy trudo-
voy migratsii v sovremennoy Rossii. Otsenka faktorov i effektov [Region-Spe-
cific Differences in Transnational Labor Migration in Modern Russia: As-
sessing the Factors and Effects]. Ekaterinburg: Institute of Economics, Ural
Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Vandyshev M. (2016) Territorialny printsip razmeshcheniya trudovykh immi-
grantov v bolshom gorode [Geography of Immigrant Worker Accommo-
dation in Large Cities]. Dinamika i inertsionnost vosproizvodstva nase-
leniya i zameshcheniya pokoleniy v Rossii i SNG. T. 2. Demograficheskiy
potentsial regionov Rossii i SNG: dinamika rosta i inertsionnost izmeneniy
[Dynamics and Inertia of Population Reproduction and Generational Re-
placement in Russia and the CIS Countries. Vol. 2. Demographic Poten-
tial of Regions in Russia and the CIS Countries: Growth Dynamics and
Resistance to Change] (eds A. Tatarkin, A. Kuzmin), Ekaterinburg: Insti-
tute of Economics, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences,
pp. 331–337.
Vandyshev M., Veselkova N., Petrova L., Pryamikova L. (2009) Vzaimodeystvie
detey immigrantov s prinimayushchim soobshchestvom v sisteme shkolnogo
i doshkolnogo obrazovaniya: obzor rezultatov issledovaniya [How Immigrant
Children Interact with Host Communities within School and Preschool Educa-
tion Systems: An Overview of Research Findings]. Vzaimodeystvie immigran-
tov i prinimayushchego soobshchestva v usloviyakh krupnogo rossiyskogo
goroda: sb. nauch. st. [Interactions Between Immigrants and Host Commu-
nities in Large Cities of Russia. Collection of Scholarly Articles] (eds K. Kuz-
min, L. Petrova), Ekaterinburg: Ural State Pedagogical University.
Varshaver E., Rocheva A., Ivanova N. (2017) Vtoroe pokolenie migrantov v Rossii
v vozraste 18–30 let: kharakteristiki strukturnoy integratsii [Second-Gener-
ation Migrants in Russia of the Age 18–30 Years Old: Characteristics of the
Structural Integration]. Social Policy and Sociology, vol. 16, no 5, pp. 63–72.
Vellanki V., Prince S. P. (2018) Where Are the “People Like Me”? A Collabora-
tive Autoethnography of Transnational Lives and Teacher Education in the
U. S. Teacher Educator, vol. 53, no 3, pp. 313–327.
Vlasova T. (2013) Inklyuzivnye i eksklyuzivnye praktiki v sisteme natsionalnogo
obrazovaniya: case study shkoly s etnokulturnym komponentom goroda
P RA C T I C E
Izhevska [Inclusion and Exclusion in Ethnic Education: Case Study of the

Ethnic School in Izhevsk]. The Journal of Social Policy Studies, vol. 11, no 2,
pp. 207–220.
Vorozhcov E. (2006) Molodezhnye volneniya vo Frantsii: problemy immigrat-
sii i obrazovaniya [Youth riots in France: issues of immigration and educa-
tion]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 2, pp. 23–29.
Yu S. (2018) Mobilocality. Urban Geography, vol. 39, no 4, pp. 563–586.
Zborovsky G., Shuklina E., Zasipkin V. (2015) Obrazovatelnye i adaptatsionnye
praktiki detey migrantov v usloviyakh mezhnatsionalnoy intolerantnosti [Ed-
ucational and Adaptation Practices of Migrants Children in the Conditions of
International Intolerance]. Izvestia Ural Federal University Journal. Series 1.
Issues in Education, Science and Culture, vol. 135, no 1, pp.70–83.

The Justice of Inequality, or Who Wins the Social Theory
Olympiad and How
Authors Olga Boytsova

Doctor of Sciences in Politics, Professor at the Philosophy of Politics and Law
Department, Faculty of Philosophy, Lomonosov Moscow State University; Dep-
uty Chairman of the Central Subject-Specific Methodology Board of the Russian
School Student Olympiad in Social Theory. Address: GSP‑1, Faculty of Philoso-
phy, Shuvalov Building, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Lenin Hills, 119991
Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: olga.boitsova@gmail.com
Dmitry Nosov
Candidate of Sciences in Philosophy, Professor, School of Philosophy, Faculty
of Humanities, National Research University Higher School of Economics; Chair-
man of the Central Subject-Specific Methodology Board of the Russian School
Student Olympiad in Social Theory. Address: 20 Myasnitskaya Str., 101000 Mos-
cow, Russian Federation. E-mail: dnossov@hse.ru
Valeriya Torop
Candidate of Sciences in History, Associate Professor, Head of the Final State
Examination Maintenance Department of the Center for Training Subject-Spe-
cific Teachers at Moscow Institute of Open Education; Chairman of the Moscow
Subject-Specific Committee for Basic State Examination in Social Theory; mem-
ber of the Central Subject-Specific Methodology Board of the Russian School
Student Olympiad in Social Theory. Address: 36, Timiryazevskaya Str., 127422
Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: valeriya73@yandex.ru
Abstract Being members of the Central Subject-Specific Methodology Board for the Rus-
sian School Student Olympiad in Social Theory and members of the jury for its
final round, we discuss the specific aspects of teaching social theory at school
and preparing for the Unified State Examination and the Russian Olympiad in
that subject. We examine different kinds and types of tasks offered in different
rounds of the Olympiad, analyze their pitfalls and ultimate objectives, and dis-
cover the opportunities, prospects and challenges of applying the competen-
cy-based approach in preparing students for the Russian School Student Ol-
ympiad in Social Theory.
Keywords social theory, competency-based approach, Russian School Student Olympi-

ad, commutative and distributive justice, assessment, education, competen-
cies, humanities and social theories, Unified State Examination (USE), quali-
ty assurance in education.
DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-199-225
References Aristotle (1908) Etika [The Nicomachean Ethics]. St. Petersburg.

Bryzgalina E., Smirnova A. (2017) Rossiyskoe obrazovanie, ot lokalnykh praktik
k globalnym trendam (zametki o forume “Obrazovanie Rossii” / EDU Rus-
sia) [Russian Education: From Local Practices to Global Trends (Notes on
the EDU Russia Forum)]. Problems of Modern Education, no 3, pp. 126–136.
De Corte E. (2014) Innovatsionnye perspektivy obucheniya i prepodavaniya v
sfere vysshego obrazovaniya v XXI v. [An Innovative Perspective on Learn-
ing and Teaching in Higher Education in the 21st Century]. Voprosy obra-
P RA C T I C E
zovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 3, pp. 8–29. doi: 10.17323/1814-

9545-2014-3-8-29.
Fearon J. D. (1991) Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science.
World Politics, vol. 43, no 2, pp. 169–195.
Ionin L. (2004) Sotsiologiya kultury [Sociology of Culture]. Moscow: HSE.
Kazarbin A., Lunina Yu. (2016) Olimpiady shkolnikov kak indicator kachestva
obrazovaniya (na primere fiziko-matematicheskoy podgotovki shkolnikov v
DV-regione) [School Olympiad as an Indicator of the Quality of Education
(on the Example Physical and Mathematical Training of Students in the Far
East Region]. ASR: Pedagogy and Psychology, vol. 5, no 1 (14), pp. 57–59.
Mironov V. (2016) Protivorechivost reform rossiyskogo obrazovaniya [The Incon-
sistency of Reforms in Russian Education]. Poisk. Alternativy. Vybor, no 1,
pp. 42–57.
Ossovskaya M. (1987) Rytsar i burzhua: Issledovaniya po istorii morali [Chival-
ry and Bourgeoisie: Research in the History of Human Morality]. Moscow:
Progress.
Yekimova N. (2014) Otsenka effektivnosti shkolnogo obrazovaniya na osnove
dannykh obshcherossiyskikh olimpiad [Performance Evaluation of School
Education Based All-Russian Olympiad]. Ekonomika obrazovaniya, no 1,
pp. 33–47.
Zhiltsova I. (2011) Kompetentnostny podkhod v sotsialno-gumanitarnom obra-
zovanii [The Competence-Based Approach in the Socio-Humanitarian Edu-
cation]. Vestnik sotsialno-gumanitarnogo obrazovaniya i nauki, no 1, pp. 94–
98.

Enlightening Demands of
Russians
Lyubov Dukhanina, Aleksandr Maximenko
Received in Lyubov Dukhanina atives, interest in specific topics and for-

September 2018 Doctor of Sciences in Pedagogy, Chair- mats of educational events, motivation
man of Russian «Znanie» Society, Head for learning and development, and will-
of the Department of Pedagogy and Meth- ingness to pay for educational products,
ods of National Research Nuclear Univer- and it also tested the concept of an on-
sity MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Phys- line enlightenment portal. We analyze the
ics Institute). Address: 31 Kashirskoe current globalization trends affecting the
Hwy, 115409 Moscow, Russian Federa- formats, topics and technology of enlight-
tion. Email: Duhanina@mail.ru enment as well as educational niches that
Aleksandr Maksimenko could be of public interest and of bene-
Candidate of Science in Psychology, fit to the digital future. Conclusions are
Chairman of Kostroma Regional Branch of made about the most in-demand fields of
the Russian Society of Sociologists. Ad- study and format preferences in learning
dress: 9a Sovetskaya St, 156000 Kostroma, and development.
Russian Federation. Email: Maximenko.Al Keywords: enlightenment demands,
@gmail.com enlightenment programs, sociology of
enlightenment, lifelong learning prefer-
Abstract. The article presents the re- ences in Russia, attitude towards learn-
sults of a large-scale survey conduct- ing and development programs, Russian
ed by Russian «Znanie» Society in 2017. «Znanie» Society.
The survey measured citizen awareness
of local and national enlightenment initi- DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-226-240
Enlightenment in Enlightenment as a social activity is flexible and responds to the needs

the USSR and in of society by expanding the horizons of people; helping to overcome
Modern Russia obsolete stereotypes; contributing to the systemic synthesis of cur-
rent knowledge; revealing the horizons of emerging knowledge [Grig-
oryan 2010].
The modern concept of “enlightenment” is different from the con-
cept of “Enlightenment” of the XVIIIth century and from the concept
of “promoting education”, which was used in Soviet society. The con-
cept of “enlightenment”, according to many social philosophers and
historians of science, is semantically connected with a certain stage
in the formation of a culture of a new historical type. The term “The
Translated from Age of the Enlightenment” is traditionally referred to XVIIIth century.
Russian by The concept of “enlightenment” itself even without correlation with the
A. Gurariy.
historical period focuses not only on addressing gaps in education-
E D U C AT I O N STAT I ST I C S A N D S O C I O LO G Y
al level of population, but also on its moral component. Vladimir Dal

stressed that “the literacy itself will not reason with the peasant, it will
rather confuse him, not enlighten him”1. The Soviet scientific thought
presented the concept of enlightenment ideologically: the tendency
to eliminate social injustice, ecclesiastical obscurantism and philo-
sophical mysticism was its inherent characteristic [Yakushkina, Ilaka-
vichus 2016]. Currently, the concept of “enlightenment” has shifted
from ideological towards utilitarian and technological meaning. We
define it as an activity to promote a wide range of educational oppor-
tunities, achievements of science, technology and culture provided by
state, commercial and public institutions and to spread it among the
population for a fee or free of charge. Modern enlightenment has also
a function of educating the population in the interests of society and
the state [Maksimenko 2011] and is focused, as previously, on reduc-
ing the gap between million-plus cities and provinces in regard to the
level of public awareness.
In addition to the utilitarian character, educational activities of
modern Russia have several other features that distinguish them from
the approaches which were typical for the Soviet-era. Among them is
the predominance of individual learning over collective one, as well as
the predominance of body practices (sports, diets, etc.) over spiritual
and philosophical ones. As for the most in-demand skill to develop, it
is a self-orientation in a rapidly changing world. Educational programs
are expected to help individuals with finding some motivational drivers
and a personal path in life, rather than with understanding a scientific
view of the world, expanding one’s horizons and unchaining the world
which was typical for Soviet era.
Under the circumstances of increasing speed of life and suffering
from Future Shock [Toffler, 2002], an individual would rather prefer to
enchant the world: to filter and to manage information flows and to
search for harmony in rapidly changing environmental conditions. At
the same time, there is a lack of a preventative approach in a general
strategy of promoting educational activities [Pomelova 2009].
The image of an educator developed by the scientific and educa-
tional associations of the Soviet era has also undergone significant
changes. Vladimir Lenin [1967] depicted Russian educator as a per-
son who struggled against church dogmas, hated serfdom and fought
for freedom, self-government and total Europeanization of Russia, as
well as for upholding the interests of the masses presented mainly by
peasants. The modern educator is not just a person who struggles
against pseudoscience; his aspirations are not limited by receiving
prestigious awards from various educational associations. Research-
ers depict an educator also as a person who is ready for some mis-
1 V. I. Dal’s letter to the editor of the magazine “Russian Conversation” // Rus-

sian Conversation. 1856. Vol. III.

Enlightening Demands of Russians
sionary work and dedicates himself to educational ideals [Solomon-

ov 1993]. The contribution made by an educator distinguishes him or
her from a number of promoters of ideas and products often lobbied
by the industry.
The enlightening education has been extremely fragmented both
in content and in learning formats for the past 20 years in Russia:
high-quality projects coexist with unprofessional ones; volunteer
movement is supported by state or regional funding. There isn’t any
official list of educational organizations and projects they hold in mod-
ern Russia, which is significantly reduces the effectiveness of educa-
tional work across the country and limits the possibilities for coordi-
nated interaction [Maksimenko, Danilov 2017]. Along with the science
popularization projects (Postnauka, Kurilka Gutenberga, Science
Slam, Nauchpop, Pint of Science, and others), there are various ed-
ucational activities which are becoming popular: learning with anima-
tions, religious education, educational tourism, and other types of ed-
ucational entertainment (edutainment). There are not only traditional
educational institutions such as museums using interactive exhibits to
promote education, but also different forms of hedonistic education-
al activities. Institutions for adult education (folk high schools) are still
popular among people over 50 years old.
Studies on Enlight- The information on enlightening educational preferences of Russians

ening Education and preferred learning formats could be provided by special surveys.
Preferences of Such surveys could also provide information on skills and some per-
Russians sonal features of an individual taking part in educational activities.
There were no surveys on this issue during the Soviet era, since the
party system centrally approved the list of topics brought to the pub-
lic attention. There were plenty of surveys on lifelong learning and
professional development learning formats (advanced trainings) for
professional society as well as its content in the post-Soviet period.
At the same time, there was not any systematic nationwide social re-
search on the issue.
The 2017 survey conducted by the Russian Public Opinion Re-
search Centre (WCIOM) by request of the Russian «Znanie» Society
is one of the occasional studies on the phenomenon. The online sur-
vey was mainly concentrated on the interest of Russian youth (1500
respondents aged 16–25 years) in self-development courses and oth-
er educational trainings. According to the survey results, the respond-
ents are mostly interested in developing creativity (50%), dancing,
music, theater (24%) and sports (31%), as well as in getting a driv-
er license (36%) when designing their personal development plan.
The youth is also focused on developing communication skills (train-
ings on psychology and business education, 17-18%; public speaking,
12%); on programming (20%) and on enhancing information literacy
by attending advanced IT Office Skills courses (14–15%). Although
the youth pays continued attention to developing their foreign lan-

guage skills (20%), such an educational activity does not tend to gain
more popularity in the near future. The professional development is
also important for the respondents (22%) who are mostly interested
in postgraduate studies (maximum response rate is among respond-
ents aged 24-25 years).
The demand for an educational activity on certain topics is highly
dependent on gender. So, men have higher interest in programming
(22%), technology (23%), military-patriotic activities (16%), while
women prefer music (32%), cooking (33%), foreign languages (25%),
arts (27%), and trainings on psychology (21%), as well as fashion styl-
ing masterclasses (23%).
The results of the nationwide online-survey support our research
hypothesis regarding practical character of the youth educational de-
mands depending also on gender. According to the results, popular
science is outside the youth interest.
The target audience of the survey conducted by the Russian Public
Opinion Research Centre (WCIOM) was presented by the youth aged
16–25 years. There is no representative or reliable data on the educa-
tional demands of other age groups.
Empirical Basis of The Kostroma branch of the Russian «Znanie» Society conducted the
the Research research in 2017 to evaluate the educational demands of the popu-
lation. The data was collected using a formalized questionnaire fol-
lowed by a telephone surveying technique (Computer-assisted tele-
phone interviewing or CATI). A total of 1100 respondents participated
at the research across Russia to achieve the following research goals:
to ascertain the level of public awareness about local and national ed-
ucational projects; to determine the degree of interest in various top-
ics and learning formats; to measure motivation in terms of trainings;
to evaluate the payment capacity of population with regard to educa-
tional products; to test the concept of an online educational portal al-
lowing site visitors to subscribe to the newsletters by interests.
The central research question aims to provide the information on
specific interests of population in educational projects: whether they
intend to acquire skills in modern technologies and innovations in
order to adapt to rapidly-evolving world (Future Shock) or not. One
more assumption to be verified during the research was the theo-
ry that the population would likely take part at educational activities
without charge when projects were one-time or short-term ones; but
if there was a long-term project to develop certain skills, people, on
the contrary, would be ready to pay.
The respondents of the survey were citizens over the age of 18 to rep-
resent gender, age and type of settlement. There were 54,3% of wom-
en took part at the survey. According to the respondents, 73% of them
use Internet every day, while only 11% do not use Internet at all (Fig. 1).

Fig. . Internet usage among the survey respondents
��
Do not use Difficult to answer/refuse to answer
it at all 1%
11%
Several times
Spend more
a week
than 4 hours
and less
a day online
15%
30%
Spend less
than 4 hours
a day online
43%
Demand for According to the survey respondents, 60.8% of them evaluate their
Education educational background as inadequate and have a demand for fur-
ther education. The above average level of demand for education is
among women (the women in maternity leave represent another group
among female respondents: their interest in new knowledge is espe-
cially high); among younger age groups (up to 44 years old); among
daily users of Internet; among population of large cities; among em-
ployees, entrepreneurs, freelancers. The most popular training cours-
es are the following: foreign languages (Fig. 2), including Russian as
a foreign language (11.7%); legal and financial literacy (11.5%); gener-
al issues of history, economics, politics, sociology (11, 3%); computer
and Internet literacy (8.4%) as well as self-development, psychology
and personal effectiveness (7.5%).
Such topics as legal and financial literacy, self-development and
psychology, health, IT-technologies, cars and machinery, education
are mostly popular among younger respondents (up to 29 years old).
Respondents aged 30–44 are also interested in gaining legal and fi-
nancial literacy as well as personal effectiveness skills, while they are
more focused than younger generation on developing their skills in
business, foreign languages, architecture, building and renovation,
and doing sports. Respondents aged 45–59 reported that they would
also like to learn foreign languages, to improve their computer and In-
ternet literacy, to develop their housekeeping and handicraft knowl-
edge. Retirement age respondents are willing to get understanding of
social issues (economics, politics, sociology, history); to develop their
computer skills; to get skills in housekeeping and needlework; to get
knowledge in the field of culture and art (Table 1).
Fig. . Educational preferences of the survey

respondents (%)
Foreign languages, Russian language 11.7

Jurisprudence, law, legal literacy. Finance, fina-
ncial literacy 11.5
Economics, history, politics, sociology 11.3

Computer and Internet literacy 8.4
Psychology, communication, self-development,
personal effectiveness, public speaking 7.5
Health, medicine, pediatrics 6.5
Housekeeping, cooking, floriculture, gardening,

handicrafts, sewing and knitting 6.1
IT 5.8
Business, trading, sales, management 5.5
Creativity, photography, drawing, design 5.2
Exact and Natural Sciences, Humanities 5.2
Cars, mechanics, machinery 5.2

Architecture, building, renovation 4.8
Culture, Arts, theater, literature, music 4.5
Sports, fitness, dancing 3.4
New technologies 3.3
Education, Pedagogy 2.8
Beauty, cosmetology, makeup, style, manicure,
hairdressing 2.1
Raising children / grandchildren 2.0
A lot of courses for general development 3.9
Others 18.9
Difficult to answer 6.0
According to the research data, the public awareness of educa-

tional projects and portals is very low, while the most cited ones are
edu.ru, uchi.ru, Wikipedia, Synergy University (Moscow University of
Industry and Finance “Synergy”), LinguaLeo.
Personal Well- The expert of SKOLKOVO Education Development Centre (SEDeC)

Being, Global Pavel Luksha has suggested the educational content classification.
Issues or Future According to Luksha, there are three levels of knowledge: about per-
Expectations sonal well-being; about global issues; about future challenges. Ac-
cording to the survey respondents, they are mostly concerned about
future challenges (Fig.3). 54% of respondents are interested in gain-
ing specific skills to adapt successfully to rapidly changing environ-

Table 1. The most popular educational programs depending on age (%)
Age (years)
Average
Educational programs 18–29 30–44 45–59 over 60 results
Foreign languages, Russian language 10.4 12.2 13.2 8.5 11.7
Jurisprudence, law, legal literacy. Finance, financial literacy 14.2 14.6 7.5 6.0 11.5
Economics, history, politics, sociology 12.6 9.3 10.5 21.0 11.3
Computer and Internet literacy 0.6 3.0 15.1 26.0 8.4
Psychology, communication, self-development, personal

10.1 10.3 1.7 8.0 7.5
effectiveness, public speaking
Health, medicine, pediatrics 8.9 5.0 6.1 7.6 6.5
Housekeeping, cooking, floriculture, gardening, handicrafts,

1.7 2.5 12.6 10.7 6.1
sewing and knitting
IT 9.6 5.2 5.2 1.3 5.8
Business, trading, sales, management 2.8 7.5 6.8 1.0 5.5
Creativity, photography, drawing, design 5.9 5.7 4.9 2.7 5.2
Exact and Natural Sciences, Humanities 3.6 3.5 6.4 6.7 5.2
Cars, mechanics, machinery 7.2 5.7 3.7 3.2 5.2
Architecture, building, renovation 2.8 7.0 4.5 2.1 4.8
Culture, Arts, theater, literature, music 6.1 2.7 4.6 7.0 4.5
Sports, fitness, dancing 4.8 5.4 1.2 0.0 3.4
New technologies 2.8 2.1 4.4 5.9 3.3
Education, Pedagogy 6.2 1.7 2.2 0.8 2.8
Beauty, cosmetology, makeup, style, manicure, hairdressing 3.6 2.6 1.1 0.0 2.1
Raising children / grandchildren 2.6 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0
A lot of courses for general development 2.8 1.9 7.6 3.9 3.9
Others 17.1 22.8 16.6 15.7 18.9
Difficult to answer 4.9 8.1 4.0 6.4 6.0
ment (Future Shock). The research data confirms Luksha’s theory that
an individual is scared of rapidly changing technology and innovations
and confused by new terms and reality. Therefore, the introduction of
new reality to the society should be one of the goals of the Russian So-
ciety “Knowledge”.
The respondents also mentioned the following topics related to
knowledge about personal well-being as most demanded (the response
rate is more than 15%): healthy lifestyle and proper nutrition (21,6%),
Fig. . Interest in lectures on various topics according

to the survey respondents (%)
Personal well-being, self-deve-

lopment, health 42.2
Global issues 39.6

Adaptation to the rapidly chang-
ing environment (Future Shock) 53.9
legal and financial literacy (20,7%), adult and child health (20,6%),
psychology of relations (17,6%), foreign languages (17,4%), basics
of communication (15,3%), vocational guidance for children (15,2%).
As for the general knowledge, the respondents are interested in
Russian history, culture, ecology, and regional studies (more than
17%). 16% of respondents would like to develop their media literacy
skills to separate fake news from the truth.
According to the survey respondents, the future challenges are re-
lated to technological innovation in medicine, robotics, alternative en-
ergy sources and space exploration (the response rate is more than
20%). 15% of respondents are interested in cryptocurrency.
Therefore, the incoming issues and changes they will cause are
one of the significant topics among educational demands of Russians.
Whereas previously the population was mostly interested in gaining
geographic knowledge (including space exploration) or understand-
ing patterns in history, modern society is focused on trainings de-
veloping skills for an uncertain future. As a result, people search for
those educational projects which expand their knowledge about life
planning.
Preferred The main educational sources according to the respondents of the

Learning survey are television (TV shows, documentaries) (49,5%) and the In-
Formats ternet providing an access to online articles, webinars and videos (the
response rate is more than 42%). Offline learning (lectures and master
classes) are less popular: only 17–20% of respondents regard these
formats as convenient and suitable for them. Perhaps the popularity
is lower because these learning formats are usually not free of charge.
16% of respondents use groups in social networks and blogs to get
new information (Fig. 4). Women are more likely to try different online
and offline learning formats compared to men.
Table 2 represents the differences in the preferred learning for-
mats depending on the age group. Respondents under the age of 44
are ready to different learning formats: within the framework of the
survey they mentioned 2,7 options. The main sources of knowledge

Fig. . Preferred learning formats according to the survey

respondents (%)
Online reading of articles or popular science

magazines 42.3
Watching educational programs and documen-

taries on TV 49.5
Online watching of educational videos, webinars 42.8
Visiting lectures on various topics 19.9
Participation in master classes 16.9

Following blogs and groups in social networks
on particular topics 16.3
Listening to audiobooks, podcasts 13.6
Visiting hobby groups 12.7

Participation in trainings 11.9
Participation in intellectual games, scientific bat-
tles 9.9
Participation in online marathons 8.7
Own option 3.5
Difficult to answer 1.5
Nothing. I do not want to learn anything 4.9
for this group of respondents are the Internet (reading online articles,
watching webinars and online videos) and television. Younger people
are also willing to attend offline educational events, such as lectures,
workshops and trainings. They are twice as likely as respondents over
the age of 44 to choose face-to-face educational activities. The one
more difference between younger people aged 18–29 years from older
age groups is their readiness to learn from bloggers and through so-
cial networks as well as to participate in online marathons.
Older generation mentioned on average only two possible learning
formats. That means they are more conservative in their preferences
and have a limited access to information. The main source of knowl-
edge for them is television (62%). Although they do not often use the
Internet, it has already become an important learning channel (32% of
older respondents read online articles, watch online videos and webi-
nars). As for the hobby groups, they are more popular among elderly
people than among young population.
Therefore, the main educational sources are television (49,5%)
and the Internet (42%). Face-to-face educational activities hardly
gain 20% according to the research data. There are visible differenc-
es in preferred learning formats depending on age. Younger people
are ready to try different learning formats, including new ones; they
Table 2. The most preferred learning formats depending on age (%)
Age (years)
Preferred learning formats 18–29 30–44 45–59 over 60
Online reading of articles or popular science magazines 45,2 45,0 41,9 32,4
Online watching of educational videos, webinars 46,4 49,9 37,5 32,0
Visiting lectures on various topics 27,3 21,7 14,4 16,0
Following blogs and groups in social networks on particular topics 23,7 18,2 11,8 9,3
Watching educational programs and documentaries on TV 37,0 47,7 55,0 62,2
Listening to audiobooks, podcasts 15,5 15,2 13,4 7,4
Participation in master classes 21,7 17,4 16,1 9,3
Participation in trainings 20,0 13,4 8,4 2,8
Participation in online marathons 10,1 12,1 7,2 2,0
Visiting hobby groups 9,8 12,6 13,6 16,0
Participation in intellectual games, scientific battles 13,8 8,0 9,8 8,0
Own option 1,4 4,3 3,8 4,6
Difficult to answer 1,3 1,2 2,7 0,0
Nothing. I do not want to learn anything 2,6 2,8 6,4 10,2
are prepared to learn from popular social media personalities (blog-

gers). Older people prefer to gain new knowledge from TV shows and
through face-to-face communication (hobby clubs and lectures).
The respondents were also asked to list some key characteristics
of an ideal educator. The participants of focus groups imagine an ed-
ucator as intelligent, educated and influential person. Younger gener-
ation named Master Yoda as a suitable character, while older genera-
tion mentioned Fedor Aniskin as an example of an educator.
According to the list of jobs for the future, an educator refers to
disappearing jobs which will not exist in 15–20 years. In order to pre-
vent it, the Russian «Znanie» Society should provide educators with
advanced trainings to improve their acting and public speaking skills.
Price for Educa- More than one-third of respondents suggested each educational ac-
tional Activities tivity should be free of charge (Fig. 5). This applies particularly to lec-
tures and hobby groups (up to 45% of respondents expect them to
be free of charge). In contrast, the most acceptable price for those
who are ready to pay for lectures or hobby groups is up to 300 rubles
(the response rate varies from 14 to 19% depending on the learn-
ing format) or up to 500 rubles (12–15%). According to the respond-

Fig. . Acceptable price for educational activities according to survey

respondents (%)
Lectures 44.1
19.1
14.3
8.9
2.3
1.8
9.5
Trainings 33.0
15.9
14.8
13.5
It should be free of 4.3
charge 3.9
up to 300 RUB 14.6
up to 500 RUB Hobby groups/ 44.7

up to 1000 RUB other activities 13.6
12.1
up to 2000 RUB 10.3
3.8
up to 5000 RUB 2.2
difficult to answer 13.3
ents, the cost of trainings and master classes can be higher compared
with price for lectures or hobby groups. However, it does not suppose
any educational events (meetings with scientists, intellectual games,
hobby groups, etc.) to be free of charge or cost less than 300 rubles,
since the survey was not focused on any particular event. Therefore,
the price can be significantly higher in the specific case supported by
effective advertising.
The attitude towards payment for educational activities is connect-
ed strongly with age and income rate: the older the respondent and
the lower his or her income is, the more he or she expects education-
al activities costing little or nothing.
Conclusions and The interest in enlightening education and demand for gaining gen-
Recommendations eral knowledge on different topics are relatively high among Russian
population. While trainings on foreign languages, accounting etc. are
actively organized by different state and private educational organiza-
tions, the trainings on wide range of topics do not have any proper or-
ganizational system. Among these topics are the following: Internet lit-
eracy; legal and financial literacy for beginners; adult and child health;
new technologies etc. There is also a demand for expanding general
knowledge. The technologies of the future are of specific interest, be-
cause individuals are usually unfamiliar with them what makes them
feel frightened.
Mass culture also affects Russians and their educational demands

which are becoming more pragmatic. Such tendency undoubtedly ac-
tualizes the problem of preserving the spiritual heritage and its trans-
mitting in intergenerational interaction.
The nearest future and transformations it will cause are one of the
most important topics among educational requests of Russians, ac-
cording to the research data. As a result, Russians are more interest-
ed in life planning strategies and tend to act more rationally compared
to the past.
The television (49.5%) and the Internet (42%) are the major edu-
cational sources. Face-to-face educational activities hardly gain 20%
according to the research data. There are significant differences in
preferences regarding learning formats among different age groups.
As for the age and income rate, they have an impact on an individu-
al’s attitude towards training fees: the older the respondent and the
lower his income is, the more he or she expects educational activities
to be free of charge.
Enlightenment might be regarded as a powerful resource for ed-
ucational work which is neglected due to the interest of population for
self-development trainings and gaining general knowledge. However,
Russians are still interested in issues in national development; in ed-
ucation; in religion and its role in human life and society. In order to
provide an individual with critical skills for the nearest future, enlight-
enment as a system should be based on expert opinion and should
be ready to implement modern ways of communication with popula-
tion. Such research as presented in the article can make a practical
contribution to the issue.
References Grigoryan G. (2010) Aktualnye problemy prosvetitelstva v sovremennoy Rossii

[Challenging Enlightenment Issues in Modern Russia]. Available at: http://
www.prosvetitelstvo.ru/docs/impiipd.php? ELEMENT_ID=926 (accessed
10 May 2019).
Maksimenko A. (2011) Tsennostnoe upravlenie i ego znachenie v sovremennom
menedzhmente [Value Management and Its Role in Modern Management].
Terra Humana, no 2, pp. 98–102.
Maksimenko A., Danilov V. (2017) Prosvetitelstvo v Rossii: problemy i vyzovy [En-
lightenment in Russia: Issues and Challenges], Kostroma: Znanie.
Pomelova E. (2009) Prosvetitelstvo kak sotsialno-pedagogicheskiy fenomen
[The Enlightenment as a Phenomenon of Native Pedagogics]. Herald of Vy-
atka State University, no 4 (3), pp. 23–31.
Solomonov Y. (1993) Krizis prosvetitelskoy modeli kultury [Crisis of the Enlight-
enment Model of Culture] (PhD Thesis abstract), Moscow: Institute of Phi-
losophy, Russian Academy of Sciences.
Toffler A. (2002) Shok budushchego [Future Shock], Moscow: AST.
Yakushina M., Ilakavichus M. (2016) Prosvetitelstvo kak resurs razvitiya prostran-
stva obrazovaniya vzroslykh gosudarstv—uchastnikov SNG [Enlightening as
Resource for Adult Education Space Development in CIS]. Scientific Dia-
logue, no 3 (51), pp. 354–364.

Extracurricular Activities of School Students: Functions,
Parental Strategies, and Expected Outcomes
Authors Kseniya Pavlenko

Candidate of Sciences in Sociology, Analyst, Center for Modern Childhood Stud-
ies, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Eco-
nomics. E-mail: kpavlenko@hse.ru
Katerina Polivanova
Doctor of Sciences in Psychology, Professor, Scientific Advisor of the Center for
Modern Childhood Studies, Institute of Education, National Research Universi-
ty Higher School of Economics. E-mail: kpolivanova@hse.ru
Alexandra Bochaver
Candidate of Sciences in Psychology, Research Fellow, Center for Modern
Childhood Studies, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher
School of Economics. E-mail: abochaver@hse.ru
Elizaveta Sivak
Director of the Center for Modern Childhood Studies, Institute of Education, Na-
tional Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: esivak@hse.ru
Address: 20 Myasnitskaya Str., 101000 Moscow, Russian Federation.
Abstract A questionnaire survey (N = 6,648) and semi-structured interviews with par-

ents of school students in a Russian megalopolis were carried out to analyze
how families perceive the functions of extracurricular activities (ECAs), what
choice strategies they follow, and what outcomes they expect. The study is
premised on the assumption that ECAs for school students are not homoge-
neous in terms of their mission and expected outcomes. Empirical data is used
to examine the compensatory and enriching functions of ECAs. The compen-
satory function is about closing gaps in school education through providing
subject-specific classes. Enriching ECAs engage students beyond the school
curriculum, contributing to diversity of the learning environment. Interview anal-
ysis allows identifying two major strategies followed by families when choos-
ing enriching ECAs, depending on which type of skills they seek to cultivate in
their children, soft (meta-subject competencies) or hard (specific knowledge
shaped institutionally).
Keywords school, extracurricular activities, family, student engagement in extracurricular

activities, compensatory function of extracurricular activities, enriching func-
tion of extracurricular activities.
DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-241-261
References Bray M., Lykins C. (2016) Tenevoe obrazovanie: chastnoe dopolnitelnoe obu-
chenie i ego vyzovy organam gosudarstvennogo upravleniya v sfere obra-
zovaniya stran aziatskogo regiona [Private Supplementary Tutoring and Its
Implications for Policy Makers in Asia]. Tomsk: Tomsk Polytechnic Univer-
sity.
Burdyak A. (2015) Dopolnitelnye zanyatiya po shkolnym predmetam: motivatsi-
ya i rasprostranennost [Additional School Subjects’ Lessons: Motivation and
Popularity]. The Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Chang-
es Journal, no 2, pp. 96–112.
Filippova D., Kosaretskiy S., Kupriyanov B. (2015) Ozhidaniya i povedenie se-

mey v sfere dopolnitel’nogo obrazovaniya detey [Parental Expectations and
Behaviors Concerning Extracurricular Activities]. Information Bulletin of the
Monitoring of Education Markets and Organizations, no 4 (86), Moscow: Na-
tional Research University Higher School of Economics. Available at: https://
www.hse.ru/data/2015/07/24/1086053657/IB MEO #4 (86) 2015.pdf (ac-
cessed 20 May 2019).
Goshin M., Kosaretskiy S. (2017) Aktual’nye strategii povedeniya roditeley na
rynke uslug dopolnitel’nogo obrazovaniya [Parental Behavior Strategies in
Today’s ECA Market]. Information Bulletin of the Monitoring of Education
Markets and Organizations, no 18 (117), Moscow: National Research Univer-
sity Higher School of Economics. Available at: https://memo.hse.ru/ (ac-
cessed 20 May 2019).
Ivaniushina V., Alexandrov D. (2014) Sotsializatsiya cherez neformalnoe obra-
zovanie: vneklassnaya deyatelnost rossiyskikh shkolnikov [Socialization
Through Informal Education: Extracurricular Activities of Russian School Stu-
dents]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 3, pp. 174–
196. doi: 10.17323/1814-9545-2014-3-174-196.
Kosaretskiy S., Abankina I., Mertsalova T. et al. (2017) Analiticheskiy doklad o
sostoyanii sistemy dopolnitelnogo obrazovaniya detey v Rossiyskoy Feder-
atsii v usloviyakh realizatsii Kontseptsii razvitiya dopolnitelnogo obrazovaniya
detey—2017 [Analytical Report on the Contemporary System of Extracurric-
ular Education for Children in the Russian Federation in the Context of Imple-
menting the Roadmap for Extracurricular Education of Children: 2017]. Avail-
able at: http://www.eseur.ru/Files/file6096.pdf (accessed 20 May 2019).
Kosaretsky S., Kupriyanov B., Filippova D. (2016) Osobennosti uchastiya detey
v dopolnitelnom obrazovanii, obuslovlennye razlichiyami v kulturno-obrazo-
vatelnom i imushchestvennom statuse semey i meste prozhivaniya [Specif-
ic Features of Children Involvement in Supplementary Education Depend-
ing on Cultural, Educational and Financial Status of Families and Place of
Living]. Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 1, pp. 168–
190. doi: 10.17323/1814-9545-2016-1-168-190.
Lareau A. (2000) Home Advantage: Social Class and Parental Intervention in El-
ementary Education. Lanhem, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Lareau A. (2011) Unequal Сhildhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley; Los
Angeles; London: University of California.
Lauer A. P., Akiba M., Wilkerson S., Apthorp H., Snow D., Martin-Glenn M. (2006)
Out-of-School-Time Programs: A Meta-Analysis of Effects for At-Risk Stu-
dents. Review of Educational Research, vol. 76, no 2, pp. 275–313.
North D. C. (1993) Instituty i ekonomicheskiy rost: istoricheskoe vvedenie [In-
stitutions and Economic Growth: An Historical Introductio]. Thesis, iss. 2,
pp. 69–91.
Prakhov I. (2014) Vliyanie investitsiy v dopolnitelnuyu podgotovku na rezultaty
EGE [Effects of Investments in Preparation Courses on the USE Scores].
Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, no 3, pp. 74–99. doi:
10.17323/1814-9545-2014-3-74-99.
Sobkin V., Kalashnikova E. (2013) Uchenik osnovnoy shkoly: otnoshenie k dopol-
nitelnomu obrazovaniyu [The Main School Pupil: The Attitude to Additional
Education]. Voprosy Psychologii, no 4, pp. 16–26.
Swanson C. B. (2002) Spending Time or Investing Time? Involvement in High
School Curricular and Extracurricular Activities as Strategic Action. Ration-
ality and Society, vol. 14, no 4, pp. 431–471.
Teachman J. D. (2007) The Living Arrangements of Children and Their Education-
al Well-Being. Journal of Family Issues, vol. 29, no 6, pp. 734–761.
Vincent C., Ball S. J. (2007) Making Up the Middle-Class Child: Families, Activi-
ties and Class Dispositions. Sociology, vol. 41, no 6, pp. 1061–1077.

Kseniya Pavlenko, Katerina Polivanova, Alexandra Bochaver, Elizaveta Sivak
Extracurricular Activities of School Students
White A. M., Gager C. T. (2007) Idle Hands and Empty Pockets? Youth Involve-
ment in Extracurricular Activities, Social Capital, and Economic Status. Youth
& Society, vol. 39, no 1, pp. 75–111.
Zaff J. F., Moore K. A., Papillo A. R., Williams S.(2003) Implications of Extracurric-
ular Activity Participation during Adolescence on Positive Outcomes. Jour-
nal of Adolescent Research, vol. 18, no 6, pp. 599–630.
Zhirova N., Malova Y. (2017) Vozmozhnost dostizheniya metapredmetnykh i lich-
nostnykh obrazovatelnykh rezultatov v protsesse obucheniya po dopolnitel-
nym obshcherazvivayushchim programmam [Possibility of Achieving Me-
ta-Subject and Personal Development Learning Outcomes as a Result of
General Development Extracurricular Activities]. Pro_DOD, no 5 (11), pp. 23–
38.
Zuev P., Trusova S. (2015) Objektivnaya otsenka rezultatov osvoeniya dopol-
nitelnykh obshcheobrazovatelnykh program uchashchimisya kak sredst-
vo povysheniya kachestva obrazovaniya v organizatsiyakh dopolnitelnogo
obrazovaniya [Objective Estimation of Assimilation of Additional Education-
al Programmes by Students as a Tool for Education Quality Development in
Institutions of Additional Education]. Pedagogical Education in Russia, no 9,
pp. 118–124.
Liberal and Conservative Trends in Post-Soviet Social
Policies for Children
Author Lidia Okolskaya

Candidate of Sciences in Sociology, Senior Researcher, Federal Sociolo-
gy Research Center, Russian Academy of Sciences. Address: Bld. 5, 24/35
Krzhizhanovskogo Str., 117218 Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: okoli@
yandex.ru
Abstract This study examines the framework documents capturing the political rhetoric
on children as well as different versions of the Russian law on children’s rights
to explore how government agencies perceive and treat children as a social
group and what social policy values and norms are at play in this field in Rus-
sia. The sample includes documents of two genres: general child protection
policies and existing laws. Content analysis allows identifying the underlying
values and the principles of treating children (universalism, self-direction, be-
nevolence, conservation, openness to change) as well as the methods of social
policy (incentivization, normalization, prohibition) that have been reflected in the
legislative documents. Analysis of how social policies for children were chang-
ing from the 1990s through the 2010s shows that both liberal and conservative
trends were present. The liberal trend of the 2010s consisted in taking terms
and values from the international legislative experience. In particular, children
have come to be recognized as social actors and full-fledged participants of
societal processes; the government’s perception of children as a social group
has become more individualized; orphanage deinstitutionalization is occurring;
children’s need for belonging and love has been acknowledged; the values of
autonomy, such as independence and responsibility, are being encouraged in
children. The conservative trend in social policies for children manifests itself
in a statistically significant growth of support for the traditional values, such as
multigenerational households, parental a uthority, and family loyalty.
Keywords children, social policy, government, children’s rights, family, upbringing val-
ues, modernization, emancipation, conservatism, legislation, rhetoric, con-
tent analysis.
DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-262-292
References Alwin D. F. (1986) Religion and Parental Child-Rearing Orientations: Evidence of

a Catholic-Protestant Convergence. American Journal of Sociology, vol. 92,
no 2, pp. 412–440.
Ariès P. (1999) Rebenok i semeynaya zhizn pri Starom poryadke [Centuries of
Childhood: A Social History of Family Life]. Ekaterinburg: Ural State Uni-
versity.
Austin J. (1999) Kak sovershat deystviya pri pomoshchi slov [How to Do Things
with Words]. Austin J. Izbrannoe [Selected Works], Moscow: Ideya-Press;
Dom intellektualnoy knigi, pp. 13–135.
Bendina O. (2007) “Chem rebyat branit i bit, luchshe knizhku im kupit!”: diskursy
zhestokogo obrashcheniya s detmi v 1920–1930-e gody (na materialakh
Saratovskoy gubernii) [“Rather than Scolding and Beating the Children, It
Is Better to Buy Them Books”: Child Abuse Discourses in the 1920s–1930s
(The Case of Saratov Governorate)]. Sovetskaya sotsialnaya politika 1920–
1930-kh godov: ideologiya i povsednevnost’ [Soviet Social Policies in
the 1920s–1930s: Ideology and Everyday Life]. (eds P. Romanov, Y. Yar-

Lidia Okolskaya
Liberal and Conservative Trends in Post-Soviet Social Policies for Children
skaya-Smirnova), Moscow: Variant, Center for Gender and Social Policy

Studies, pp. 392–413.
Bysov L. (2010) «Neokonservativnaya volna» v sovremennoy Rossii: faza
ocherednogo tsikla ili stabilnoe sostoyanie? [“Neo-Conservative Wave” in
Contemporary Russia: A Phase of the Next Cycle or a Stable Stage?]. Uni-
verse of Russia, no 1, pp. 3–44.
Culvert K. (2009) Deti v dome: materialnaya kultura rannego detstva, 1600–1900
[Children in the House: The Material Culture of Early Childhood, 1600–1900].
Moscow: The New Literary Observer.
Devyatko I., Abramov R., Katerny I. (eds) (2017) Normy i moral v sotsiologich-
eskoy teorii: ot klassicheskikh kontseptsiy k novym ideyam [Norms and Mo-
rality in Sociological Theory: From Classical Concepts to New Ideas]. Mos-
cow: Ves mir.
Faradzhev K. (2002) Prikladnye aspekty proekta sotsialnoy inzhenerii: sotsiologi-
ya obrazovaniya v poslerevolyutsionnoy Rossii (1917–1930) [Applied Aspects
of the Social Engineering Project: Sociology of Education in Post-Revolu-
tionary Russia (1917–1930)]. Moscow: Center for Sociology of Education,
Russian Academy of Education.
Grigoryeva I. (2017) Sto let transformatsiy sotsialnoy politiki v Rossii [One Hun-
dred Years of Social Policy Transformation in Russia]. Journal of Social Pol-
icy Studies, vol. 15, no 4, pp. 497–514.
Gurko T. (2013) O kontseptsii gosudarstvennoy semeynoy politiki Rossiyskoy
Federatsii na period do 2025 goda: ekspertnaya otsenka [The Concept of
Government Family Policy of Russian Federation over a Period 2025: Sug-
gestions for Improvement]. Sotsiologicheskaya nauka i socialnaya praktika,
no 3, pp. 33–52.
Disney T. (2017) Etnograficheskiy vzglyad na rol emotsiy v rossiyskom detskom
dome [Ethnographic Perspectives on Emotion in a Russian Orphanage]. The
Journal of Social Policy Studies, vol. 15, no 3, pp. 407–420.
Inglehart R. (2018) Kulturnaya evolyutsiya: kak izmenyayutsya chelovecheskie
motivatsii i kak eto menyaet mir [Cultural Evolution: People’s Motivations Are
Changing, and Reshaping the World]. Moscow: Mysl.
Ivin A. (1998) Logika. Uchebnoe posobie. [Logic. Study Guide]. Moscow: Znanie.
Kalabikhina I., Kuchmaeva O. (2014) Problemy i perspektivy monitoringa uchas-
tiya detey v realizatsii “Natsionalnoy strategii deystviy v interesakh detey
na 2012–2017 gg.” [The Challenges and Future Prospects for Monitoring
Children’s Participation in the National Strategy for Action in the Interests
of Children 2012–2017]. The Journal of Social Policy Studies, vol. 14, no 4,
pp. 507–520.
Kelly C. (2009) Tovarishch Pavlik: Vzlet i padenie sovetskogo malchika-geroya
[Comrade Pavlik: The Rise and Fall of a Soviet Boy Hero]. Moscow: The New
Literary Observer.
Kohn M. L. (1959a) Social Class and the Exercise of Parental Authority. American
Sociological Review, vol. 24, no 3, pp. 352–366.
Kohn M. L. (1963) Social Class and Parent-Child Relationships: An Interpretation.
American Journal of Sociology, vol. 68, no 4, pp. 471–480.
Kohn M. L. (1959b) Social Class and Parental Values. American Journal of Soci-
ology, vol. 64, no 4, pp. 337–351.
Kulmala M., Rasell M., Chernova Zh. (2017) Overhauling Russia’s Child Welfare
System: Institutional and Ideational Factors behind the Paradigm Shift. The
Journal of Social Policy Studies, vol. 15, no 3, pp. 353–366.
Lenski G. E. (1963) The Religious Factor. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Levada Y. (2000) Ot mneniy k ponimaniyu. Sotsiologicheskie ocherki 1993–2000
[From Opinion to Understanding: Essays in Sociology, 1993–2000]. Mos-
cow: Moscow School of Political Studies.
H I STO RY O F E D U C AT I O N
Livshits E. (2008) Dorevolyutsionnye po forme, sovetskie po soderzhaniyu? Obra-

zovatelnye reformy v gody voyny i poslevoyennye poiski normy [Pre-Revolu-
tionary in Form, Soviet in Content? Education Reforms During the War, and
the Post-War Quest for the Norm]. Sovetskaya sotsialnaya politika: stseny
i deystvuyushchie litsa, 1940–1985 [Soviet Social Policy: Scenes and Actors]
(eds Y. Yarskaya-Smirnova, P. Romanov), Moscow: Variant, Center for Gen-
der and Social Policy Studies, pp. 151–173.
Magun V. (2011) Dvizhenie ot traditsionnykh semeynykh norm k sovremennym:
sravnenie Rossii i Frantsii [The Movement from Traditional Family Norms to
Modern Ones: A Comparison of Russia and France]. Vestnik Instituta Sotzi-
ologii, no 2, pp. 106–116.
Magun V., Fabrikant M. (2014) Semeynye tsennosti rossiyan i evropeytsev [Fam-
ily Values in Russia vs Europe]. Demoscope Weekly, nos 613–614. Available
at: http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2014/0613/tema01.php (accessed 6
May 2019).
Magun V., Rudnev M. (2010) Bazovye tsennosti rossiyan v evropeyskom kontek-
ste [Basic Values of Russians in the European Context]. Social Sciences and
Contemporary World, no 4, pp. 5–17.
Maslow A. H. (1954) Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper & Row.
McClelland D.C. (1961) The Achieving Society. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Melville A. (2017) Neokonservativny consensus v Rossii? Osnovnye komponen-
ty, factory ustoychivosti, potentsial erozii [Neoconservative Consensus in
Russia? (Main Components, Factors of Stability, Potential for Erosion)]. Po-
liteia, no 1 (84), pp. 29–45.
Okolskaia L. (2017) Zhelaemye kachestva detey, ikh struktura i dinamika v
postsovetskoy Rossii [Important Child’s Qualities in Post-soviet Russia: Pri-
oritiss and Trends in Parental Values]. Rossiya reformiruyushchayasya, iss.
15, pp. 479–515.
Radina N. (2018) Nezavisimye media i initsiativy gosudarstvennoy semeynoy poli-
tiki na etape “pronatalistskogo povorota” [Independent Media and Initiatives
in State Family Policy during the “Pronatalist Turn”]. The Journal of Social
Policy Studies, vol. 16, no 2, pp. 295–310.
Romanov P., Yarskaya-Smirnova Y. (2008) Ideologiya sotsialnoy politiki i prakti-
ka sotsialnogo obsluzhivaniya v period liberalnykh reform [Ideology of Social
Policy and Social Service Practices in the Era of Liberal Reforms]. Sotsial-
naya politika v sovremennoy Rossii: reformy i povsednevnost (eds P. Ro-
manov, Y. Yarskaya-Smirnova), Moscow: Center for Gender and Social Pol-
icy Studies, Variant, pp. 80–105.
Sakevich V., Denisov B. (2017) Aktivnost zakonodatelya v oblasti reproduktivnykh
prav i yeye vliyanie na dinamiku preryvaniy beremennosti v Rossiyskoy Fed-
eratsii [Legislation Activity in Reproductive Rights and Its Influence on Abor-
tion Rates in the Russian Federation]. XVII Aprelskaya mezhdunarodnaya
nauchnaya konferentsiya po problemam razvitiya ekonomiki i obshchestva.
V 4 kn. [17th April International Academic Conference on Economic and So-
cial Development. In Four Books] (ed. Y. Yasin), Moscow: National Research
University Higher School of Economics, Book 3, pp. 207–214.
Selishchev A. (2010) Yazyk revolyutsionnoy epokhi: iz nablyudeniy nad russkim
yazykom (1917–1926) [The Language of the Revolutionary Era: From Obser-
vations of the Russian Language (1917–1926)]. Moscow: Librokom.
Semya G. (2016) Natsionalnaya strategiya deystviy v interesakh detey v Rossii
i strategii Soveta Yevropy po pravam rebenka [Russia’s National Strategy
for Acting in Children’s Interests vs. Action on the Rights of the Child in Eu-
rope]. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, vol. 21, no 1, pp. 108–118.
Shcheglova S.(2004) Transformatsiya detstva v sovremennom rossijskom obtsh-
chestve i imperativy razvitiya gosudarstvennoy politiki v interesah detey [The

Lidia Okolskaya
Liberal and Conservative Trends in Post-Soviet Social Policies for Children
Transformation of Childhood in the Modern Russian Society and The Imper-

atives of Development of State Policy in Childs Interest]. The Journal of So-
cial Policy Studies, vol. 2, no 2, pp. 175–188.
Shvabauer A. (2017) Gorkie plody Natsionalnoy strategii deystviy v interesakh de-
tey na 2012–2017 g. [The Bitter Fruits of the 2012–2017 National Strategy for
Acting in Children’s Interests]. Available at: http://xn——btbgbfbav8dmbqer.
xn—p1ai/News/?newsid=1248 (accessed 6 May 2019).
Schwartz S. H. (2006) Value Orientations: Measurement, Antecedents and Con-
sequences across Nations. Measuring Attitudes Cross-Nationally—Lessons
from the European Social Survey (eds C. Jowell, R. Roberts, G. E. Fitzger-
ald). London: Sage, pp. 161–193.
Trotsky L. (2017) Predannaya revolyutsiya: Chto takoe SSSR i kuda on idet? [The
Revolution Betrayed: What Is the Soviet Union and Where Is It Going?]. Mos-
cow: T8.
Vershinina D. (2018) Traditsionnye tsennosti v gosudarstvennoy i obshchestven-
noy ritorike Rossii 2010-kh godov: osnovnye kontsepty i problem [Tradition-
al Values in Russian State and Public Rhetoric of the 2010s: Basic Concepts
and Problems]. Bulletin of Udmurt University. Sociology. Political Science.
International Relations, vol. 2, iss. 4, pp. 477–484.
Vishnevsky A. (1998) Serp i rubl: Konservativnaya modernizatsiya v SSSR [Ruble
and Sickle: Conservative Modernization in the USSR]. Moscow: United Hu-
manitarian Publishers.
Yarskaya-Smirnova Y., Romanov P., Lebina N. (2008) Sovetskaya sotsialnaya
politika i povsednevnost, 1940–1980-e [Social Policy and Everyday Life in the
Soviet Union, 1940s‑1980s]. Sovetskaya sotsialnaya politika: stseny i deyst-
vuyushchie litsa, 1940–1985 [Soviet Social Policy: Scenes and Actors] (eds
Y. Yarskaya-Smirnova, P. Romanov), Moscow: Variant, Center for Gender
and Social Policy Studies, pp. 7–32.
Zelikova Yu. (2012) Vliyanie sotsialnoy politiki i roditelskikh tsennostey na semey-
noe povedenie i vospitanie detey: mezhstranovy analiz [Influence of Regime
of Welfare and Parenting Values on Family Behavior and Education of Chil-
dren: Cross-Country Analysis]. The Journal of Social Policy Studies, vol. 10,
no 3, pp. 343–360.
Raising a Professor, or How Higher School Teachers
Were Trained in the Russian Empire1
Review of the book: Ivanov A. Uchenoe dostoinstvo
Rossiyskoy imperii. XVIII —nachalo XX veka. Podgotovka
i nauchnaya attestatsiya professorov i prepodavateley
vysshey shkoly2 [Scientific Dignity in the Russian Empire. 18th
to Early 20th Century. Training and Qualifying Professors and
Higher School Teachers]
Author Kseniya Belik

Research Intern, Poletayev Institute for Theoretical and Historical Studies in
the Humanities, National Research University Higher School of Economics. Ad-
dress: Bld. 1, 21/4 Staraya Basmannaya Str., 105066 Moscow, Russian Federa-
tion. E-mail: kseniabelik2402@gmail.com
Abstract Anatoly Ivanov’s book Scientific Dignity in the Russian Empire. 18th to Early
20th Century. Training and Qualifying Professors and Higher School Teach-
ers gives the idea of academic degree attestation and awarding practices fol-
lowed by Russian Empire universities. The structure and content of the book
are analyzed from the perspective of its research potential and implications
for historical science.
Keywords higher education, Russian empire, academic qualifications, academic degrees,

academic ranks, educational traditions.
DOI: 10.17323/1814-9545-2019-2-293-298
References Ivanov A. (1994) Uchenye stepeni v Rossiyskoy imperii. XVIII v.—1917 g. [Academ-
ic Degrees in the Russian Empire. 18th Century to 1917]. Moscow: Institute
of Russian History, Russian Academy of Sciences.
Shmidt S. (ed.) (2003) Akademik S. F. Platonov: perepiska s istorikami v 2 t. T. I.
Pisma S. F. Platonova, 1883–1930 [Academician Sergey Platonov: Corre-
spondence with Historians in Two Volumes. Vol. I. Letters by Sergey Platon-
ov, 1883–1930]. Moscow: Nauka.
Sukhova N. (2012) Sistema nauchno-bogoslovskoy attestatsii v Rossii v XIX—na-
chale XX v. [The System of Scientific-Theological Certification in Russia in
the 19th–Early 20th Century]. Moscow: Saint Tikhon’s Orthodox University.
Volobuev P. (1996) Retsenziya na knigu Ivanov A. Y. “Uchenye stepeni v Rossi-
yskoy imperii. XVIII v.—1917 g.” M.: IRI RAN, 1994 [Review of the Book: Iva-
nov A. (1994) Academic Degrees in the Russian Empire. 18th Century to 1917.
Moscow: Institute of Russian History, Russian Academy of Sciences]. Herald
of the Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 66, no 3, pp. 3–17.
1 The article was prepared within the framework of the HSE University Basic
Research Program and funded by the Russian Academic Excellence Project
“5–100”.
2 Moscow: Novy khronograf, 2016.

VO 2 2019 EN

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VO 2 2019 EN

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

VO 2 2019 EN

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

National Research University Higher School of Economics

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow

The mission of the journal is to provide a medium for professional discus-

Educational Studies Moscow

THEORETICAL AND APPLIED RESEARCH

Aleksander Veraksa, Margarita Gavrilova,

Lyubov Dukhanina, Aleksandr Maksimenko

BOOK REVIEWS AND SURVEY ARTICLES

Internationalization as a concept and strategic agenda is a relatively

1.1. Medieval Many publications on the internationalization of higher education refer

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

became an international institution the university had first to become a

initiatives that had been introduced in Germany and Sweden in the

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

2 This section builds on [Altbach et al. 2017; de Wit, Altbach 2018].

an ongoing demand for quality higher education, resulting in brain

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

2.5. Changing The emphasis in internationalization has traditionally been on ex-

But a counter-reaction is emerging. The rise of nationalist-popu-

3. Implications The massification of higher education and the increasing importance

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

implies that one has to internationalize at home, to be able to equip

A gradual move of internationalization from margin to core has tak-

“Internationalization at Home is the purposeful integration of inter-

The second one as:

“Internationalization of the curriculum is the process of incorporat-

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

“A Commitment and Action to Infuse International, Global and Com-

• More focused on internationalization abroad than on internation-

In the past decade, however, one can observe a reaction to these

At the same time there is a move away from internationalization

tution around the world engage in the process. Internationalization

Recent publications, have given more attention to these emerging

1. We must, as scholars and practitioners, not only continue but also

Working towards inclusive international and intercultural learning for

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

ministries of education, and in an emerging international education

1. Increasing importance of internationalization in the higher edu-

4. Internationalization no longer is the exclusive domain of the SIOs

“Intelligent internationalization” demands the development of a

In tandem, an updated definition of internationalization emerged, re-

“The intentional process of integrating an international, intercultur-

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

6. Implications The main focus in internationalization strategies and plans is still at

tutions and individuals to assist in meeting national strategic goals

The challenges that institutions encounter in their internationalization

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

research and teaching becomes more important. Is this a realistic

• Do not let your institution’s strategy be driven by rankings, but let

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 8–34

Jones E., de Wit H. (2014) Globalized Internationalization: Implications for Policy

Author Mikhail Sokolov

Keywords national academic system, selective academic system, transformative academ-

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 35–77

Clark B. (1977) Academic Power in Italy. Bureaucracy and Oligarchy in National

Hargens L., Hagstrom W. (1967) Sponsored and Contest Mobility of Academic

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 35–77

Shapin S. (1994) A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seven-

Received in Maria Novikova specifically its prevalence, age, gen-

Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow. 2019. No 2. P. 78–97