Suchergebnisse

The article focuses on the features of University risk-management. The article shows the groups of the risks in higher education, which are based on the risk-management theory and international ISO%standards of risk-management and quality management. The author grounds the following risks for Universities: personnel risks, contingent risks, image-risks, procedural risks, management risks, innovative risks, industrial risks, financial risks, social risks, governmental risks and risks of organizations. They can be divided into three groups: inside, outside and edge risks. The author also describes three levels of managerial decision at University: the top management level, the level of a chair or a department, the level of a teacher or employee. The groups of risks were explained on every managerial level. The author comes to the conclusion that collective risk management is the most effective way to manage the risks and to improve higher education quality. ; В статье рассмотрены особенности использования положений риск-менеджмента в сфере управления качеством высшего образования. На основе общей теории риск-менеджмента, а также международных стандартов управления рисками и управления качеством серии ISO выделены и описаны группы внутренних, внешних и пограничных рисков вуза: кадровые, контингент-риски, имидж-риски, процессуальные, организационные, инновационные, технико-производственные, финансовые, социальные, риски государства, риски общества, риски предприятий и организаций. Описаны уровни принятия управленческих решений относительно улучшения качества образовательных услуг вуза - уровень ректората, уровень кафедры/факультета/отдела, уровень преподавателя/сотрудника. Кроме того, раскрыто проявление групп рисков на каждом уровне. В заключение статьи автором обоснован вывод о необходимости коллективной работы по управлению рисками в вузе для достижения высокого качества образования.

The article is dedicated to the assessment of the correlation between the values of self-expression and survival among modern Russian students. The relevance of this topic is determined by the need to understand how to change the higher education system so that it correlates with the values of modern students and applicants, meets their expectations and needs. The article examines two aspects of the transformation of higher education: the institutional limitations of the modernisation of higher education and the value orientations of modern Russian students. Value orientations were operationalised using the approach of R. Inglehart and K. Welzel, based on the dichotomy of values of self-expression and survival, and institutional conditions - through the reproduction by the higher education system of the institutional trap "path-dependence", to overcome which "critical mass" of subjects with dominant values of self-expression is required. The main research question was whether Russian bachelors have developed values of self-expression. The empirical basis of the study was the data of a mass survey of Russian students of 19 universities within the framework of the project "The Birth of a Russian Master's Degree" with the support of the Vladimir Potanin Charitable Foundation.

The research toolkit included a number of categories reflecting the meanings that students use when analysing the reasons for choosing a university, the direction of training and learning outcomes. One of these categories is the category of choice (of the university and field of study). The data obtained indicate that when answering the question about the reasons for choosing a university and the direction of study, there are, on average, two and a half times more students who chose the values of self-expression than those who are clearly focused on the values of survival. This suggests that, firstly, the importance of the values of emancipation (freedom of choice and development) in higher education is growing. Secondly, the potential for changes at the value level is accumulated in groups of students with different cultural capital - that is, we can talk about universal tendencies among the entire studied group. Thirdly, the choice of the direction of study turned out to be a more significant factor in the distribution of values than the choice of a university, that is, the motives for choosing a student are biased towards the content of their professional education in the first place, and the prestige of the university in the second place. Based on their analysis of the collected data, the authors come to the conclusion that modern Russian students are ready for meaningful changes in higher education. The only question is what answer to expect from the system.