Economic Crises and the Post-Massification of Higher Education

Author(s):  
Jung Cheol Shin ◽  
Yangson Kim
2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-82
Author(s):  
V. F. Pugach

The article considers the massification of higher education in post-Soviet Russia and shows its special aspects against the background of the studentship history in our country from 1917 to 2017. The main cause of the boom in the sphere of higher education at the turn of the century is the social and economic transformation of the society. The emergence of private universities and fee-based education in the public sector of higher education provided opportunities for broad segments of society. The unmet demand for higher education has resulted in an upsurge in the interest to higher education among the society. The similar boom and wave-like dynamics may be traced regarding postgraduate training due to long lasting deficit. The paper presents the results of comparing student body dynamics in universities, postgraduate and doctoral schools and shows the boom synchronicity at the levels of universities and postgraduate schools.


Author(s):  
A. Kustova ◽  
◽  
I. Rozmainsky ◽  

Today the concept of trust plays an important role in economics, but there is a lack of both works devoted to the determinants of generalized trust in modern Russia and relationships between the crises and trust. The Russian economy has suffered several significant recessions in recent years, the most serious of which were crises of 2008 and 2014. It would be interesting to check whether there was a trust change after these events in Russia. The current study has two purposes: the first one is to identify determinants of trust in modern Russia, the second one is to check whether the economic crises of 2008-2009 and 2014-2015 affected the level of generalized trust with the assumption that only population of working age was affected. The study is based on the RLMS-HSE survey. For the purposes of this paper the random-effects ordered logistic models and difference-in-difference ordered logistic models are used. We conclude that the most important determinants of trust are political confidence, age, living in a countryside, higher education; the 2008 crisis did not make influence on trust, where as the 2014 crisis affected on the trust in a positive direction due to the “propaganda effect”.


In recent years attention to quality of studies is not decreasing. Lots of different level and type articles have been written, books and other literature have been published. On the other hand, over the last few years different national, regional and international science conferences and symposiums took place. So, it is obvious, that the concern in the university study quality is really huge. However, the essence of the matter lies somewhere deeper. The main goals, formulated in Bologna declaration, had to be implemented by 2010. However, now it becomes clear, that some of the vitally important things were not realised and there are more and more doubts if they will, on the whole, be carried through. The Bologna process itself is not sought to be analysed. What interests us firstly, is the quality of studies’ management question. Various researches reveal that the university study quality in some countries has significantly decreased even measuring according to the most minimal criteria. First of all, this is because most universities are oriented into providing service. It is known, that service University is not capable to ensure the proper quality of the studies and of provided education at the same time. Mass universities meant for mass usage. University education is more and more “Mc.Donaldized” (Lamanauskas, 2011a). Thus, the problem of the quality of studies remains the key problem in nowadays university work. It is understandable, that different countries have different experience in this field both in horizontal and vertical sense. The quality of studies conception despite all efforts remains diverse and has multiple meanings. Paraphrasing a familiar soviet times’ statement (“from everyone – according to possibilities, for everyone – according to demands”), one can state, that higher education can’t be provided according to demands, and it can’t be required from graduates according to their abilities and possibilities. Massification of higher education in a direct way negatively affects the quality of studies (process), as well as higher education quality (result). This is the essential risk in university management. Key words: education policy, quality of studies, management, university education system.


Author(s):  
Miriam E. David

The global expansion of higher education since the last quarter of the 20th century reflects political and socioeconomic developments, including opening up economic opportunities and addressing neoliberal agendas such as corporatization, digitization, individualization, and marketization. This process of the so-called massification of higher education has also been called academic capitalism, whereby business models predominate what was once considered a public good and a form of liberal arts education. These transformations have implications for questions of equal opportunity and social justice in regard to gender and sexuality linked to diversity, race, and social class, or intersectionality. Transformations include involvement and participation for students, academics, faculty, and researchers. From a feminist perspective, the various transformations have not increased equality or equity but have instead reinforced notions of male power, misogyny and patriarchy, and social class and privilege, despite the massive increase in involvement of women as students and academics through policies of widening access or participation. The new models of global higher education exacerbate rather than erode inequalities of power and prestige between regions, institutions, and gendered, classed, and raced individuals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document