IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/scn/accntn/y2018i6p17-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Совершенствование системы контроля деятельности университетов в Российской Федерации // Improving the System of Control of Universities’ in the Russian Federation

Author

Listed:
  • R. Bulyga P.

    (Financial University)

  • A. Amerslanova N.

    (Financial University)

  • Р. Булыга П.

    (Финансовый университет)

  • А. Амерсланова Н.

    (Финансовый университет)

Abstract

The article reviews the existing system of control of universities’ activity in the Russian Federation. The authors single out two blocks of this system (internal and external) along with three components of external control of universities’ activity (state control; professional control; public control). The article describes the characteristic features of particular forms of state control over universities’ activity (state accreditation of educational programs, federal state control of education quality; federal state supervision over education); public control over universities’activity (public accreditation of educational programs, independent assessment of education quality); professional control over universities’ activity (professional and public accreditation of educational programs, assigning rating to universities); internal control over universities’ activity (self examination in higher educational institutions, internal control of a university as an economic entity, internal assessment of education quality). The article examines the effectiveness of control procedures applied to the main objects of control (educational programs, quality of students training, conditions of educational activity, target results of activity) and singles out the following basic trends of improving the control over universities’ activity: the increased importance of assessing the effectiveness of educational programs implementation and informal control procedures based on expert evaluations and sociological surveys. The following major directions of improving the system of control over universities’ activity in Russia are suggested: developing the state and professional system of control; establishing the audit trails of an educational system; creating the mechanisms of acknowledging the results of control by the inspectors and auditors of different level; shifting the emphasis of state control from formal methods to the check of substantive aspects (quality) of the educational process; developing the tools and methods of professional control over universities’ activity; adapting the indexes of universities global ratings to the special national features of higher educational institutions; developing the internal monitoring of effciency and quality of educational programs’ implementation and informal types of internal independent assessment of education quality. В статье проведен обзор существующей системы контроля деятельности вузов в Российской Федерации. Выделены два блока системы контроля деятельности университетов (внутренний и внешний контроль), а также три компонента внешнего контроля деятельности университетов (государственный контроль, профессиональный контроль, общественный контроль). Дана характеристика конкретных форм государственного контроля деятельности университетов (государственной аккредитации образовательных программ, федерального государственного контроля качества образования, федерального государственного надзора в сфере образования, мониторинга в системе образования); общественного контроля деятельности университетов (общественной аккредитации образовательных программ, независимой оценки качества образования); профессионального контроля деятельности университетов (профессионально-общественной аккредитации образовательных программ, рейтингования вузов); внутреннего контроля деятельности университетов (самообследования вузов; внутреннего контроля деятельности университета как экономического субъекта, внутренней оценки качества образования). Проведен анализ действенности процедур контроля в отношении основных объектов контроля деятельности университетов (образовательных программ, качества подготовки обучающихся, условий осуществления образовательной деятельности, целевых результатов деятельности). Выделены основные тренды совершенствования контроля деятельности университетов: повышение значимости оценки эффективности реализации образовательных программ и неформальных процедур контроля, основанных на экспертных оценках и социологических опросах. Предложены основные направления совершенствования системы контроля деятельности университетов в России: формирование государственно-профессиональной модели контроля; становление сквозного контроля системы образования; создание механизмов признания результатов контроля проверяющими разного уровня; смещение акцентов государственного контроля с формальных методов к проверке содержательных аспектов (качества) образовательного процесса; развитие инструментария и методологии профессионального контроля деятельности университетов; адаптация показателей глобальных рейтингов университетов к национальной специфике вузов; развитие внутреннего мониторинга эффективности и качества реализации образовательных программ и неформальных видов внутренней независимой оценки качества образования.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Bulyga P. & A. Amerslanova N. & Р. Булыга П. & А. Амерсланова Н., 2018. "Совершенствование системы контроля деятельности университетов в Российской Федерации // Improving the System of Control of Universities’ in the Russian Federation," Учет. Анализ. Аудит // Accounting. Analysis. Auditing, ФГОБУВО "Финансовый университет при Правительстве Российской Федерации" // Financial University under The Government of Russian Federation, vol. 5(6), pages 17-27.
  • Handle: RePEc:scn:accntn:y:2018:i:6:p:17-27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://accounting.fa.ru/jour/article/viewFile/38/39.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goodall, Amanda H., 2009. "Highly cited leaders and the performance of research universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1079-1092, September.
    2. Cyrenne, Philippe & Chan, Alan, 2012. "High school grades and university performance: A case study," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 524-542.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hyeonchae Yang & Woo-Sung Jung, 2015. "A strategic management approach for Korean public research institutes based on bibliometric investigation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1437-1464, July.
    2. Black, Sandra E. & Lincove, Jane & Cullinane, Jennifer & Veron, Rachel, 2015. "Can you leave high school behind?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 52-63.
    3. Esther Hormiga & Petra Saá-Pérez & Nieves L. Díaz-Díaz & José Luis Ballesteros-Rodríguez & Inmaculada Aguiar-Diaz, 2017. "The influence of entrepreneurial orientation on the performance of academic research groups: the mediating role of knowledge sharing," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 10-32, February.
    4. John McCormack & Carol Propper & Sarah Smith, 2014. "Herding Cats? Management and University Performance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(578), pages 534-564, August.
    5. Beattie, Graham & Laliberté, Jean-William P. & Oreopoulos, Philip, 2018. "Thrivers and divers: Using non-academic measures to predict college success and failure," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 170-182.
    6. Pedro Luis Silva & Carla Sá & Ricardo Biscaia & Pedro N. Teixeira, 2022. "High school and exam scores: Does their predictive validity for academic performance vary with programme selectivity?," NIPE Working Papers 4/2022, NIPE - Universidade do Minho.
    7. Sezgin Polat & Jean-Jacques Paul, 2016. "How to predict university performance: a case study from a prestigious Turkish university?," Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación volume 11, in: José Manuel Cordero Ferrera & Rosa Simancas Rodríguez (ed.), Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación 11, edition 1, volume 11, chapter 22, pages 423-434, Asociación de Economía de la Educación.
    8. Charles L. Baum & Christopher J. Ruhm, 2016. "The Changing Benefits of Early Work Experience," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 83(2), pages 343-363, October.
    9. Amanda H. Goodall & John M. McDowell & Larry D. Singell, 2017. "Do Economics Departments Improve after They Appoint a Top Scholar as Chairperson?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(4), pages 546-564, November.
    10. Jacqmin, Julien & Lefebvre, Mathieu, 2016. "Does sector-specific experience matter? The case of European higher education ministers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 987-998.
    11. Daniel Sgroi & Andrew J. Oswald, 2013. "How Should Peer‐review Panels Behave?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 255-278, August.
    12. Cyrenne, Philippe & Chan, Alan, 2012. "High school grades and university performance: A case study," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 524-542.
    13. Kieron J. Barclay & Dalton Conley, 2022. "The influence of cousin order and cousin group size on educational outcomes," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2022-013, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    14. Amanda Goodall, 2013. "Should Doctors Run Hospitals?," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 11(1), pages 37-40, 04.
    15. Amanda H. Goodall, 2010. "Why Socrates Should Be In The Boardroom In Research Universities," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt6230c4jd, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    16. Goodall, Amanda H. & Kahn, Lawrence M. & Oswald, Andrew J., 2011. "Why do leaders matter? A study of expert knowledge in a superstar setting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 265-284, March.
    17. Mulyanto,, 2016. "Productivity of R&D institution: The case of Indonesia," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 78-91.
    18. Eberhard Feess & Marc Scheufen, 2016. "Academic copyright in the publishing game: a contest perspective," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 263-294, October.
    19. Goodall, Amanda H. & Kahn, Lawrence M. & Oswald, Andrew J., 2008. "Why Do Leaders Matter? The Role of Expert Knowledge," IZA Discussion Papers 3583, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Bridgewater, Sue & Kahn, Lawrence M. & Goodall, Amanda H., 2009. "Substitution between Managers and Subordinates: Evidence from British Football," IZA Discussion Papers 4589, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:scn:accntn:y:2018:i:6:p:17-27. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Алексей Скалабан (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://accounting.fa.ru .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.