It is assumed that up to 70% of allocated funds will be spent on the purchase of equipment, so that as a result, every university would create 5-7 world-class laboratories. It is certainly important and necessary, though the experience of the IEP shows that the purchase of modern equipment does not yet provide a quality breakthrough in scientific and educational activities.
The status of "national research" university in some way confusing, because behind it there is a temporary, although long-term, project financing of development programs of universities, base on a slightly adjusted principles of IEP. Research universities obtain an additional budget funding in the framework of traditional mechanism for federal programs – on the terms of 20% co-financing (as in the IEP) and are allowed to spend funds on certain items to implement their stated development programs.
Similarities and differences between the IEP, research universities and federal universities are displayed in Fig. 1.
How effective can be the given status It depends, firstly, on how universities have been selected, which have received the status. Secondly, it depends on the conditions created to the status universities in order to enable them to achieve their goals.
The decision to establish federal universities can be regarded as purely political, adopted at the highest government level, without extensive coordination and discussions. This was once again confirmed in 2009, when President Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree on the establishment of five federal universities2 in Russia, selected with regard to the regional factors, but unknown to the public criteria. Moreover, as follows from numerous discussions, the transformation of higher schools in the federal ones was surprise to their employees.
If the main criterion for the selection of universities to transform them into federal ones consisted in the uniformity of the distribution of federal universities through the regions, then one should not expect special effect from the fact that some universities will be merged and they will receive an additional funding. This is confirmed by available foreign experience. In addition, nearly three-year development history of SFU and YuFU has identified a number of challenges, primarily related to the existing administrative and bureaucratic restrictions which could be eliminated (such as was done for MSU and SPSU). The transformation to the autonomous agencies removes only part of the problems and at the same time becomes a source of new ones (for example, it is not clear how scientific research will be supported, how relationships with the founder will be built, etc.). Therefore with regard to the experience of Federal Government Order No. 1613-p from November 2, 2009.
Presidential Decree No.1172, dated October 21, 2009 "On establishment of federal universities in the North West, Volga, Urals and Far Eastern Federal Districts”.
Section Social Sphere SFU and SFU, granting of federal status to the new universities should be accompanied by non-financial measures as well. Otherwise there automatically arises low efficiency of budget spending.
New government initiatives Innovative educational National research Federal universities program (IEP) universities RUR 30 bn from 57 high schools 14 high schools RUR 50 bn for Objective – national budget in 2009—regional de2006—(plan) velopment 5 universities will be 20% co-financing 20% co-financing 2 universities established in are established 2010–Objective – new Objective – to become one of quality of edu- the best 500 universities of cation the world in 10-15 years Fig. 1. Types of Universities with a New Status Selection of universities can also be considered as political decision, as 12 universities were selected from 136 applicants. It is known from the practice of expert selection that when the level of competition is more than 10 nominations for one "place", the choice is not based on the quality of applications as there will be obviously more high-quality projects than the number, which can be financed. What happened as a result On the one hand, there were selected strong high schools - from 14 universities, which today acquired the status of "national research" (12 selected through a tender in October 2009 and 2 pilot universities that have received this status in late 2008 - National Nuclear Research institute (MEPI) and National Technological University "Moscow Institute of Steel and Alloys (MISA NITU), 12 were the winners of IEP. On the other hand, in the rating of Russian universities in terms of scientific achievements, which was made for the education agencies in 2009 by an independent rating agency "ReytOR, newly emerged "research" universities occupy a good but not the best position: only 5 universities of the 14 belong to the first twenty ones. However, if we take into account that the research university is not "real" title, inconsistent with the Western standards, granted not for the inventions and achievements of the universities, but only the support to universities in the form of the five-year development programs, everything falls in place. In 2010, a tender is planned to select 16 more universities, which will be awarded the status of a national research university.
It is distinctive, that great hope assigned by the Government to the intensification of innovation in the activity of research universities, the creation of new scientific results and their commercial efficiency in the industry. Meanwhile, it is known from foreign experience that there is no direct relationship between extended funding to the institutes and universities and RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks research "output". In particular, the estimates have shown that there is no direct correlation between the doubling of the budget of National Institutes of Health in the United States, which took place in 1998-2003 and the dynamics of patenting, licensing and agreements on joint research with the business. Herewith, the absence of a clear correlation is typical not only for the period of the budget doubling, but for the next 5 years, when based on the new discoveries made during abrupt budget increases on biomedical research and development, patenting and licensing could be significantly increased.Basic provisions governing the activities of Russian research universities, remain the same as for other universities. In this regard, there is a difference between Russian initiatives and similar programs implemented in several countries with growing economies. For example, in Kazakhstan, 9 universities have the status of national ones, which means not only additional national budget funding, but also the introduction of a number of specific guidelines, including those that wages are higher than the average rate. With regard to the Western experience, particularly that of the best universities in the world, the USA and Britain, where no status is not provided for the universities. The category "research university" is not awarded, but established by the fact of its activities as a result of voluntary participation in the ranking and its position by a number of criteria - such as the amount of research funding per one tutor, publications, citations and international awards (Nobel and Fields awards), the demand for graduates in the labor market, the development of their careers.
As a result, the question naturally arises: why there is a need for statuses, such as "national research university" Will the artificial creation of "inequality" contribute to improve the quality of education and science in high schools And would not the policy be more effective, if the government preferred creation of favorable conditions for work, including the development of science for all universities And they could have then apply for budgetary financing of research projects depending on their capacity to receive or not this additional funding on a competitive basis. Thus, ultimately, an "elite" group would emerge among the total mass of universities, which will be a natural result of the development in a competitive environment and equal opportunities.
By all appearances, Russia remains committed to the path of "status" with the aim to "rise in the ratings" - the mentality, that goes beyond the strictly scientific or innovation activity, but rather capturing them. In fact, the idea of assigning a status has a historical trend, if we recall a number of other distinguished and well-established titles (the leading scientific schools, public research centers). Thus, in the course of time the concept of status and level of prestige get smeared out. This happened with the status of leading scientific schools, the same thing happens with the status of the State Scientific Center (SSC). In January 2010, the Federal Law "On Amendments to the Article 5 of the Federal Law "On Science and State Science and Technology Policy" entered into force2. Now the status can be assigned to the organization of any form of ownership, which has a unique equipment and the ability to demonstrate the international recognition of its scientific and technological activities. Thus, currently the SSC is not a unique organization of the former industrial science, responsible for the development of certain industries (technologies) in the country, but the successfully operating organizations with unique equipment.
http://ott.od.nih.gov/about_nih/statistics.aspx Federal Law No. 358-FZ of 27 December 2009 "On Amendments to Article 5 of the Federal Law "On Science and Government Science and Technology Policy".
Section Social Sphere The policy of creating a "progressive inequality" has involved not only universities, but also a number of organizations in other sectors of science. The selected principle is the same: the new status, And in view of it - merger of organizations, creation of conglomerates, and the support of the new structure through a significant surplus budget funding, allocated on the basis of a special government order. Under this scheme a new National Research Center - Kurchatov Institute was established in 2009. By the Decree of the RF President 3 organizations were joined to the Institute, one of which is an academic institution, and two others are Federal State Unitary Enterprises.1 By the same decree Kurchatov Institute becomes the chief manager of budgetary funds, as "the most remarkable institution of science", and then by the order of the Government of Russia receives additional budget funding for the program of its development.2 As in the case of federal universities, with the formation of new organizations the administrative arbitrariness was observed, since the staff of the number of “merged” organizations were not aware of the impending reorganization.
For the new structure quantitative performance indicators of development are established, many of which seem too low (for example, to increase the percentage of young scientists and experts in the total number of employees to 10%), especially against the background of the allocated additional budget funds (RUR 10 billion for 3 years).3 A similar approach is likely to be used in the enlargement of the Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI) - under its management Ministry of Industry and Trade plans to join all the other research institutes, relevant to the development of aircraft technologies.4 All in all, it is planned to establish 5.7 national research centers under such scheme.On the one hand, the additional support of the best universities and “centers of excellence" can contribute to the emergence of qualitatively new scientific results. On the other hand, consolidation of structures means to some extent the growth of monopolies in science, which, as experience shows, leads to a decrease in the quality of scientific research. Therefore, such a critically important procedures for the selection and formation of status organizations, as well as the balance between the support for advanced institutions and the creation of an overall favorable environment for the development of scientific research.
In the past year, systemic organizational reform of the sphere of science has not been initiated,6 despite the issue of the governmental regulation "On the performance evaluation of scientific organizations, performing research, development and civil engineering works" (No. as of April 8, 2009). Under this decision all organizations after a proper inventory will be divided into three categories - the leaders, stable and those that lost the scientific profile and development prospects. Then, measures have to be taken to optimize the organizational structure RF President’s Decree No. 1084, dated of September 30, 2009 "On additional measures to implement a pilot project to establish a National Research Center "Kurchatov Institute".
RF government Order of ratifying the “Programs of support and development for the research, technology and engineering infrastructure of the National Research Center "Kurchatov Institute" No. 1730-p of November 16, 2009.
National Kurchatov Institute http://strf.ru/material.aspxd_no=26643&CatalogId=221&print=1 January 13, 2010.
Boris Alyoshin will take care of aerodynamics // Commersant. No. 225. December 2, 2009. P. 9.
At the start of five years. Preme Minister instructed the Kurchatov Institute experts / / Poisk.No. 1-2. January 1-2, 2010. P. More information on the initiative to assess the organizations, see: Russian Economy in 2008. Trends and Prospects. Issue 30. Moscow: IET, 2009. P. 408-410.
RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks of science structure and funding flows. In fact, this work has been substituted by project for the status granting.
4. 4. 4. Priorit ies of Nat ional HR Policy in Science In 2009, the priorities of the last year are totally preserved in HR policy: the main focus was sustained on the issues of supporting and involving young people in science, as well as the development of relations with former Russian scientists, who are working abroad to attract them, either temporarily or permanently, to the Russian science.
In 2008, for the first time in the last 10 years was observed an upward trend in the share of academic staff aged 30-39 years (Table 2), in the background of in the continuing decline in the two subsequent cohorts. This can be explained by a considerable number of government initiatives, aimed at supporting the young (under 35) scientists.
Материалы этого сайта размещены для ознакомления, все права принадлежат их авторам.
Если Вы не согласны с тем, что Ваш материал размещён на этом сайте, пожалуйста, напишите нам, мы в течении 1-2 рабочих дней удалим его.