Higher education in modern Russia

Higher education in modern Russia

 
 
      I. INTRODUCTION Profound socio-economic changes that started in Russia during the last decade of the 20-th century changed the role and significance of every social institution in the country. Social behavior also underwent and is still undergoing significant modifications. People now set social goals quite different from those in the past and choose different means to pursue them. However, now as ever people define their social position in terms of social goals they would like to achieve and seek to optimize their behavior to obtain maximal results for their efforts. This principle is also applicable to the personal behavior with regards to education. The sphere of higher education in Russian Federation underwent profound changes.

     The phenomena we are now seeing in the Russian higher education can truly be characterized as extraordinary. Unfortunately, this area remains virtually unexplored. This study is an attempt to supply initial information describing the motivational structure that regulates personal behavior in the sphere of the higher education in contemporary Russia. During the last decade of the Soviet Union, there had been an active discussion about overproduction of college-educated specialists and a mismatch between the structure of the college- level education and the real needs of the national economy. It was expected that market reforms would create a "normal" motivation for college education, e.g. people would have to base their educational goals on the demands of the economy and labor market. Neither Soviet nor Russian economy required or could absorb a well-educated workforce, so it was expected that market reform would shrink the Russian higher education. Indeed, the economic crisis in the early 1990s led to a sharp drop in college enrollment. However, starting from 1993, we see a sustained growth of the entire system of college education in Russia. First, the number of state colleges and universities is growing, albeit slowly. Education in the state colleges mostly remains free. Private colleges, with tuition fee, were first created in 1993, and their number has been growing ever since. In the 1990-91, the Russian Federation had 514 state colleges, whereas today it has 607 state and 358 private colleges with the 2 total of 4.7 million undergraduate students. Second, existing colleges and

 
 
1

universities are creating extra campuses at different locations. Third, colleges are growing in size and broadening the scope of the majors they offer. Many state universities now offer classes for a fee in addition to free tuition. Preparatory classes for a fee, distance learning classes, classes for adult second education and retraining are becoming widely available. The number of college undergraduates has been steadily growing since 1993. In 2000-2001, the number of undergraduate students attending state colleges and universities per 10,000 people was 327 as compared to 189 in 1995-1996. The total number of students in private colleges was 47,200 in 1993 but grew to 112,600 by 1999.

      This dynamics is typical for all regions of the Russian Federation, although the intensity of the process varies. We conducted our study in Penza, population 519,300. Penza is a fairly typical provincial city in the Russian Federation located in Volga economic region of the Central Russia, about 400 miles south-east from Moscow. It serves as the administrative center of the Penza gubernia (region) and is the largest city of the region (total population of 1,489,700). Penza has four state colleges. During 1990s, all colleges upgraded their status from specialized colleges to universities (granted by the State Department of education based on number of students, majors offered, qualifications of faculty, etc). All universities increased the number of majors they offer and broadened their scope. The number of students increased from 25,030 in the 1997-1998 academic year to 45,400 in the 2003-2004.

      Since 1993, 8 state and 3 private colleges opened their subsidiary campuses in Penza (5). Let us look more closely at the development of The Penza State Pedagogic University (PSPU) where the present study was conducted. As was typical for most colleges in 1990s, the University has grown steadily amidst a severe economic and social crisis. The momentum for such a growth did not come from the support of the State but from the people's demand. In fact, PSPU, as other Russian universities, had to contend with constant failure of the State to fulfill its

 
 
 
 
 
2

financial obligations. During 1990s, PSPU began to offer, in addition to traditional majors, majors in psychology, sociology, social work, 3 economics, management, law, computer science, journalism, ecology, biochemistry, etc. As a result, PSPU began to loose its narrow orientation on the preparation of school teachers and started training specialists for other work areas. Currently PSPU has 7576 undergraduates, 1085 of which pay for their tuition. Distant learning classes are attended by 5678 students, 2852 for a fee.

      Thus, we can conclude that PSPU demonstrated a sustained growth and development, virtually completely dissociated from the real economic situation in the country. Conceivably, this type of growth could be explained by the following factors: 1. Substantial socio-economical advantage of the college education either traditionally or due to economic growth and rising demand for trained specialists. 1. Efficient social policy of the State designed to increase living standards and education level of the population. Let us consider these factors. The idea of the socio-economical advantages associated with the college education in Russia is not supported by the facts. Most people with college degrees in the present day Russia such as physicians, teachers, college faculty, have low income, often at or even below the poverty level. To support themselves and their families, they often have to hold a second job that does not require a college degree. The salary and living standards in the today's Russia depend much more on the occupation, region, type of the firm (private or state) than on the quality of education and qualifications (7, 8, 9). The salary varies 10-15 times from region to region (10) and 7-15 times depending on the occupation (11). College education may offer certain career advantages for a person who is already employed. However, college degree does not help much in finding a job. Attractive employment remains hard to find, and in these conditions other factors such as family, clan, friendly networks and connections are by far more important for the success in the job market. At present, approximately 20% of people with a University degree are employed at occupations with lower educational requirements.

 
 
3

     4 The prospects of the economic growth in Russia remain doubtful. Gross domestic product (GDP) was in 1995 at 60.2% and in 2001 - at 67.3% as compared to the level of 1989. According to the government data, economic growth in 2002 was 6% and in 2003 - 7 % (13). In other words, Russian economy still has not reached the pre-reform level. The growth in the export of oil, natural gas, and other raw materials accounts for most of the current economic growth. This type of economic development creates a narrow demand for a particular type of specialists. It cannot possibly support a broad expansion of the entire system of college education in the country, particularly in the area of humanities that have displayed the most energetic growth. The salaries have been rising but very slowly. The living standards remain low and economic situation of the population very difficult. Mean income per person per month in Russia is just $160. During mid-1900s, 25-30% of Russian families lived in poverty, with about 18% - below the poverty line (14). The Russian government does not encourage citizens to get college education. On the contrary, there is a strong tendency on the part of the State to reduce the availability of free education. The authorities via mass media constantly stress that the educational system should be adapted to the demands of the current very limited labor market. All government-initiated attempts at educational reforms follow the same pattern: reduction and simplification, specialization and differentiation, with the goal of maximal adaptation of the professional qualification of the pool of college graduates to the structure of the labor market. The government keeps pushing the idea of со called "rationalization" of the higher education. "Rationalization" is interpreted as the need for the college education to conform to immediate short-term economic needs and available financial resources. The Russian government keeps skimping on financial support of the State universities and colleges. During 1990s, state financing of the educational institutions was paltry. There was a time when universities could not afford to pay for water or electricity and had no money for salaries to their faculty. The inevitable conclusion is that both factors, the economic situation and the government behavior, should have led to a dra5 college education, particularly in

4

humanities and basic science areas. As we will see, it is not what actually happened. The State Universities struggled to survive (there were no private colleges in Russia before 1993) offering paid educational services such as preparatory classes, retraining and secondary majors, distant learning. At that time the sponsorship system was born, which is now a widely used way for the population to financially support local Universities and colleges. We can truly say that Russian system of higher education has been growing during the last decade not because but in spite of the economic situation and intentions of the Russian government. The momentum for this growth is provided by constant popular demand. All attempts of the Russian government to implement educational reforms leading to reduction in the availability of college education invariably meet with stiff resistance of the population. It is worth noting that during the last election campaign to the State Legislation, Duma, all politicians regardless of their political affiliation or even previous statements considered it necessary to emphasize their commitment to wide availability of free college education. Therefore, we must conclude that purely economic, "rational", market-based explanation of the processes taking place in the Russian educational system is, at the very least, insufficient. In this study we set out to examine the motivations that prompt young people to seek college degree in contemporary Russia. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY Based on these considerations, we hypothesize that the motivation to attend college is primarily personal and not directly produced by external economical or social pressure or incentives. The educational motivation is derived from the specific socio-cultural and socio-psychological conditions in which young people grow up. To test the hypothesis, we need to collect verbal descriptions of the educational motivation. To appreciate sociological significance of this information, it is also essential to evaluate socio-economical and socio-psychological background on which this motivation is formed. As was mentioned earlier, the study was conducted in the Penza State Pedagogic University (PSPU). This is a good quality University ranked 21st out of 72 similar institutions. We selected   students   majoring   in   several   diverse   subjects:   foreign  languages,

5

mathematics and physics, sociology and social work, and jurisprudence (or prelaw). The first two majors were traditionally offered by the University and mostly oriented toward training of school and college teachers. Graduates majoring in these subjects have the most opportunities to make extra money offering preparatory classes (these subjects are traditionally included in admission exams in most colleges). The last two are new majors. Pre-law major is one of the most prestigious because at the beginning of the reform period lawyers were able to command good salaries. However, today's popularity of this subject is way above the real demand for this profession on the labor market. Conversely, graduates with degree in social work are in great demand, but their salaries hover barely above the poverty level. The inclusion of respondents with different areas of study makes the cohort more representative. The study was based on the verbal (declared) educational motivation by the students as well as on the collected facts pertaining to the real economical and social positions of their families. We distributed a questionnaire to PSPU students and conducted structured and open-end interviews. The aim was to understand what students consider important in their selection of the major, what they do hope to achieve by attending the University, and how much effort they are prepared to invest to obtain a college degree. The study involved a total of 340 students, or 4.49% of all students on campus. The questionnaire we developed for this study was distributed to 206 students and structured interview was conducted with 134 students. Out of 206 questionnaires, 20 were disqualified, and remaining 186 were analyzed. The first question was why they selected a particular major.

Ten answers were offered (the respondents were asked to select just one as the most important): 1) Based on my personal aptitudes and preferences; 2) Parents insisted on this major; 3) This is a prestigious and fashionable profession; 4) This major guarantees high income and high social position in future; 5) I was better prepared for the admission exams for this major; 6) This major will allow to meet the demand of the society and serve the people; 7) I had special advantages in the admission process for this major; 8) This major will ensure upward social mobility;

6

9) The choice is completely accidental; 10) Other. The analysis of the answers demonstrated quite clearly that the leading reason for the choice of a particular major was personal, e.g. personal aptitudes and preferences (#1). Almost 40%) of students gave this answer. Although about 15% of respondents were motivated by income considerations, the reasons socio-cultural (answers ##1,3,6,8) in nature were considered decisive by 55% of the students. Table 1 shows the distribution of the reasons for selecting a major among students with different majors. TABLE 1. The distribution of the motivations for selecting majors (as percents of the total number of respondents for each major) 12345678910 Sociology and social work 15.5 10.3 0 8.6 10.3 27.6 1.7 0 19.0 7.0 Pre-law 44.7 4.3 0 25.5 2.1 12.8 4.3 2.1 4.3 0 Physics and math 54.8 3.2 0 3.2 3.2 6.5 9.7 0 16.3 3.2 Foreign languages 50.0 4.0 6.0 14.0 0 12.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 2.0 TOTAL 38.7 5.9 1.6 13.4 4.3 16.1 3.8 1.08 11.8 3.2 The students majoring in sociology and social work were the only group that selected an altruistic consideration (#6, to serve the society and people) as the main reason for choosing their major. They choose their major for no particular reason (#9) or listen to their parents more often than students with other majors. In contrast, pre-law students are most often guided by their personal preferences and rarely choose their profession by chance. They are also the most practically minded valuing the prospect of high income more that other students. Future lawyers put the motive to serve the society in the third place, but it is obviously present in their motivational structure. This is the most determined lot: extraneous and accidental consideration account for only 10.7% of their choices, as opposed to, for example, 22.4%o for sociology majors. Physics majors mostly follow their heart but chance also plays a role in their decision. They are relatively indifferent to social motivations but are often influenced by external factor, particularly by special advantages in admission (#7). These advantages often stem from preparatory classes offered by the University they attend before the admission exams. Math and physics majors are the least inclined to heed their parents' advice. Students majoring in foreign languages were the only group interested in the prestige of their future profession.  The variability of the verbal motivation for college

7

education among students with different majors observed in this study cannot be explained by the differences in the place of residence, education, and profession of their parents, because all these factors were similar in all groups of students. Several factors may have contributed to this variability: 1) Particular features of a specific area of study. Aptitude for math or languages usually develops early in life and is likely to be noticed early by a child and his parents. Parents very often would then stimulate and develop this aptitude by having their child attend special classes or hiring private teachers. These special activities often predetermine the choice of the major. 2) School curriculum. When students enroll in the University, they are already familiar with physics, mathematics, jurisprudence, etc, because these subjects are included in the standard curriculum of public schools in Russia. They study one or two foreign languages from 5 th and many even from 1 st grade. In contrast, sociology is not in the curriculum. In the broadly defined classes such as "social studies", "human society", etc, the subject and the character of activity of sociologists are not adequately described. Social work as a profession, has been present in Russian society for a little more that a decade. Most people have a very vague idea of what exactly social workers do, but a common perception is that they have to be a special kind of people. 3) Situation on the labor market. Despite a recent decrease in demand for lawyers, they still have good employment prospects in big cities, particularly in Moscow. Foreign language majors, more than any other group, are aiming for the international job market, which is likely the reason for their high monetary expectations. Based on the data from our survey, we have to conclude that most students choose their majors with little regard for economic consideration. Accidental and extraneous factors make a substantial contribution and account for about 30% of the choices. However, most often students favor their personal inclinations and abilities and value social significance of the future profession. It appears that students perceive college education as a spiritual and personal enrichment rather than as a marketable commodity. The possibility of self-fulfillment seems to predominate in their choice of the major. To better understand the motivation to pursue college degree, we also asked about the goals

8

they set to themselves when they enroll in college. The question in the questionnaire read: "What goal in life do you plan to achieve by getting a college degree?" The students were asked to select one of the 12 answers: 1) Develop and refine personal abilities and qualification in order to live a richer, more fulfilling life; 2) Prepare myself for the job market to be able to obtain high paying job; 3) To improve the social status, move up on the social ladder; 4) Improve and broaden personal contacts and social life, establish a network of professional, social, and personal connections; 5) Become a respected and valued member of the community; 6) Lengthen the process of personal development and postpone entrance into "real" life; 7) Avoid army draft; 8) Find a more suitable spouse; 9) Move from rural area to a town; 10) Avoid disappointing parents; 11) Find a good company or friend and live carefree; 12) Do not know. TABLE 2. The distribution of the motivations for college education (as percents of the total number of respondents for each major) Major 1234567891011 12 Sociology and social work 13.8 43.1 13.8 12.1 10.3 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 5.2 Pre-law 17.0 48.9 12.8 8.5 10.6 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 0 Physics and math 22.6 25.8 3.2 12.9 9.7 0 6.5 0 0 3.2 6.5 9.6 Foreign languages 20.0 46.0 8.0 12.0 10.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.2 TOTAL 17.7 42.5 10.2 11.3 10.2 0.5 1.1 0 0 0.5 1.6 4.3 As shown in Table 2, material interests and goals are very important in the motivation to pursue college degree. Generally, students with different majors rank the relative importance of job and income prospects in their decision to seek college degree, in the same order as they did in their choice of majors. Pre-law students were the most and physics majors the least influenced by material considerations. Pre- law majors also demonstrated the most concentrated and physics and math majors - the most loose motivational structure. Future physicists seemed not quite sure about their goals. The importance of physics majors to the answer #7 (to avoid army draft) was due to the fact that this is the most "male" major in the female-dominated University. However, the socio-cultural components retain their significance. In total, the choice of answers #l,3,4,and 5 pertaining to the broad personal benefits of college education accounts for 49,5% of all choices. Social and personal opportunities afforded by

9

the college environment appear to be at least as important as the advantages on the labor market. Therefore, we can conclude that education is perceived by students as a broad socio-cultural and personal asset. Additional support for this idea comes from the fact that, although most students target the national (70.7% of respondents) or even regional (12%») labor market (only 113% are interested in the international job market), which are rather indifferent to education, the students still want a quality education. Answering the question: "Do you care whether you receive a high quality education?" 185 students said that the quality was very important to them and only one person did not care. A universal education seemed preferable to 78% of the students and only 22.0% preferred specialized education oriented towards practical skills. Thus, in spite of the limited nature of the contemporary labor market in Russia, the students remain very attentive to the quality of their education.

     In order to clarify the educational motivation structure of the students, in addition to questionnaire, we have conducted a structured interview that included three questions: 1) What prompted you to seek a college degree? 2) Why did you select a particular major? 3) What to you expect to gain by obtaining a college degree? The results of the interview agreed very well with the result from the questionnaire. In fact, the interview highlighted the personal motives in seeking college education even stronger that the survey. Only 16%> of the students put the prospects of better income first as the reason for attending college, and nobody considered it the only reason. The idea that college degree might improve their job prospects, bring prosperity or, at least, stability was often expressed. The students, however, made it perfectly clear that they were well aware that it may not, given the current situation of the job market. Nevertheless, along with that and most often above that there were general cultural and social considerations. Most often we heard expressions like "I want to find my place in life", "to find an interesting job", "to find a decent place in the community", "acquire knowledge and make a career using it". Interestingly, 42% of the respondents did not mention job prospects at all, but everyone stressed the importance of knowledge. Sixteen