Вестник ТГПУ им Л.Н. Толстого №3 2005

№ 3, 2005 ВЕСТНИК ТГПУ им. Л. Н. Толстого Russia has 1,304 higher education institutions of which 1,162 are accredited and in 2003 - 2004 they contained approximately 6 million students. (Rozina et al, 2005). NQFs offer an opportunity to develop and harness this enormous educational human capital. The educational transparency and progression offered by framework structures is one way that Russia can realise its educational aspirations and ‘add value’ to its student population - particularly in affording them the possibility of international mobility. Weaknesses Before 1990 in the Soviet Union, the education system was uniform and under strict centra! control. However since 1990 there has been considerable devolution of control to institutions. With this devolution came the responsibility for self-funding so it is claimed that institutions find it difficult to finance salaries and scholarships and to maintain facilities. Supporting academic international mobility may be seen as a luxury that higher institutions cannot afford. There is aiso a lack of infrastructure to underpin participation in European programmes as well as difficulties connectedwith the obtaining of visas - including Schengen visas. (Rozina et al, 2005) The legacy of the current large cohort of high quality academics since the Soviet era may diminish as the relatively low pay in the education sector causes highly qualified new graduates to prefer business and industry as career options so that a ‘brain drain’ occurs. There is a natural resistance to change, especially in large, highly organised and bureaucratic systems. Traditional, elitist higher education institutions may find it difficult to adopt the learning outcomes, assessment methods, and teaching methodologies that are typical of mass systems of participation which typically enrol up to 40% of the age group (Watson, 2005) and may aim to enlist up to 70% ( Robertson, 2003). There is a strong tradition in higher education in Russia with its own distinctive qualification systems and procedures. However these may not sit well with the flexibility of the philosophy of learning implicit in NQFs which harness, recognise and reward different types of knowledge and promote innovation, creativity and interdisciplinarity. Strengths 41 There is a legacy of free education from the Soviet era. Russia has practically 100% literacy in people over 15 years of age. More than 20% of Russian aged 30 - 59 hold 6-year degrees, twice as high as in the United States. (Wikipedia, 2005) With a population of 142.9 million and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth of 5.5% and major deposits of oil and gas powering economic growth, Russia can be considered to at the beginning of a rise provided high inflation of 9.5 % can be brought under control. Kulik (2005) notes that “|...j the education investment has become the favourite choice of many Russian parents”. A national qualification framework would enhance the possibilities of sound economic returns for these parents. In March 2004 the Russian federal and research agencies were transformed into the Ministry of Education and Science. This controis and coordinates the activities of its subordinate Federal Agency for Education and Research Supervision which supervises licensing, certification and accreditation as well recognition of equivalence of degrees received inside and outside the Russian Federation.(Rozina et al, 2005) Such a strongly centralised education system may have less difficulty in imposing new frameworks despite more institutional autonomy. Conclusion It would be impertinent to suggest that Russia should be a passive recipient of Western educational trends. Russia possesses a noble tradition of pedagogy and high standards and needs to preserve the most valuable aspects of that tradition. In an era when educational trends are crossing boundaries, the time has come for Russia to share its unique pedagogical insights with the rest of the world.