Distribution of University Admission Quotas: Problems of Competitive Selection Process

Introduction. Nowadays, an important criterion for the effectiveness of vocational education is the demand for graduates in the labour market. In order to ensure maximum compliance of the structure of training of specialists with the needs of the economy in personnel, the Ministry of Education and Science of theRussian Federation annually establishes admission quotas in universities on the basis of regional development forecasts. However, one of the options for the distribution of admission quotas in recent years has become an inter-university competition, as a result of which budget places are transferred to educational institutions only on the basis

indicators of their effectiveness, i.e. excluding the dynamics of local labour markets. While the problems of coordination of admission quotas and the need for personnel are sufficiently covered in the literature, the mechanism of the distribution of places in the competition has been insufficiently studied so far.

The aim of this research was to analyse the mechanism of competitive distribution of admission quotas on the example of higher education institutions, which provide training for bachelor and specialist programmes in the field of “Education and Pedagogical Sciences”.

Methodology and research methods. The present research is based on the methodology of integrated research, including the methods of comparative and statistical analysis of data, their systematisation and generalisation.

Results and scientific novelty. It is shown that the process of distribution of admission quotas is generated in accordance with the official competitive selection methodology. The study established that none of the indicators applied in the calculations of the effectiveness of universities’ activities were statistically related to the results of the competition. The main reason for the inability of the competitive mechanism to carry out the correct ranking of participants in terms of success is the major methodological and mathematical errors inherent in the algorithms for determining the effectiveness of educational organisations. As a result, the number of budget places allocated to each university is largely determined by chance. The results of the competitive distribution of admission quotas depend only on the industry sector of educational institutions. The widespread development of the idea of quoting of budgetary education on indicators of an interuniversity competition will inevitably aggravate a disproportion problem between territorial training and demand for them in regions. There will certainly be a deficiency of young specialists due to low mobility of graduates of the Russian higher school and reduction of the contingent of provincial higher education institutions-outsiders. Conversely, the personnel surplus will appear in the regional educational institutions (mainly metropolitan), which won the competitions. The proposals on correction of the evolving negative socio-economic situation are formulated.

Practical significance. The authors believe that the research results will make it possible to thoroughly discuss the rectilinear projection of effective outcome monitoring in higher education institutions for competitive distribution of admission quotas and the feasibility of holding a competition in general. Moreover, the results of the present study contribute to the method of competitive distribution of university admission quotas.

1. Gurtov V. A., Pitukhin E. A. Forecasting for the demands of economics in qualified personnel: Review of approaches and application experience. Universi- tetskoye upravleniye: praktika i analiz = Journal University Management: Practice and Analysis. 2017; 4 (110): 130-161. (In Russ.)

2. Polikhina N. A., Trostyanskaya I. B. Reytingi universitetov: tendentsii razvitiya, metodologiya, izmeneniya = University rankings: Trends, methodology, changes [Internet]. Moscow; 2018 [cited 2019 Apr 26] 189 p. Available from: https://elibrary.ru/download/elibrary_35862799_55569589.pdf (In Russ.)

3. Alasheev S. Yu., Kogan E. Ya, Tyurina N. V. Employer Attractiveness of universities: Measurement approaches. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies Moscow. 2016; 4: 186-205. (In Russ.)

4. Sokolov M. M. The myth of university strategy. Market niches and organisational careers of Russian universities. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies Moscow. 2017; 2: 36-73. (In Russ.)

5. Billaut J. C., Bouyssou D., Vincke P. Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? Scientometrics [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2019 Apr 06]: 84: 237-263. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0115-x

6. Hendel D. D., Stolz I. A Comparative analysis of higher education ranking systems in Europe. Tertiary Education and Management [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2019 Apr 12]:–14:–173-189. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583880802228158

7. Dill D. D., Soo M. Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2019 Apr 16] 49: 495-533. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-1746-8

8. Stevenson W. R. STEM and the history of the university ranking movement: Contextualizing trends in methodologies and criteria. In: Hawkins J., Yamada A., Yamada R., Jacob W. (eds.) New directions of STEM research and learning in the world ranking movement [Internet]. International and Development Education. Palgrave Macmillan: Cham; 2018 [cited 2019 Apr 12]. 187 p. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98666-1_2

9. Zarubina N. K. Historical and methodological aspects of planning the number of students when applying to university (scientific review). Mezhduna- rodnyy studencheskiy nauchnyy vestnik = International Student Science Journal [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2019 Apr 01]; 2. Available from: http://www.eduherald.ru/ru/article/view?id=15141 (In Russ.)

10. Pyshkin A. N. Quality evaluation in Russian higher education: System inconsistencies. In: Innovacionnaja jekonomika: regulirovanie i kohkurencija. Mate- rialy Desjatoj Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii = Innovative Economy: Regulation and Competition. Materials of the 10th International Scientific and Practical Conference; 2017; Nizhny Novgorod. p. 280-284. (In Russ.)

11. Belotserkovsky A. V. On ratings and ranks. Vysshee obrazovanie v Ros- sii = Higher Education in Russia. 2014; 1: 3-10. (In Russ.)

12. Zarubina N. K., Pykhtin A. I., Ovchinkin O. V. Evaluation of the difficulty of obtaining control figures for admission by the university. In: Molodezh’ i XXI vek Materialy VI Mezhdunarodnoy molodezhnoy nauchnoy konferentsii = Youth and XXI Century. Materials of the VI International Youth Scientific Conference. Kursk; 2016. p. 48-53. (In Russ.)

13. Ovchinkin O. V., Pykhtin A. I. Planning a number of students of the first course of university studies the example of master. Informatsionno-izmeri- telnye i upravlyayushchie sistemy = Information-Measuring and Control Systems. 2016; 10: 34-38. (In Russ.)

14. Plankova Yu. V., Shichkina Yu. A. Quality system modelling as mechanism of improving its indices. Sistemy. Metody. Tekhnologii. = Systems. Methods. Technology. 2012; 3 (15): 53-55. (In Russ.)

15. Mikhel A. A. Selection of models of integral estimation for the competitive distribution of control figures for admission to the higher education system. Vestnik Voronezhskogo instituta vysokikh tekhnologiy = The Bulletin of the Voronezh Institute of High Technologies. 2015; 1: 40-50. (In Russ.)

16. Mikhel A. A. Algorithmisation of managerial decision making on establishing admission quotas in the system of higher education. Modelirovaniye, opti- mizatsiya i informatsionnyye tekhnologii = Modelling, Optimisation and Information Technology [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Nov 12]; 1 (8). Available from: https://moit.vivt.ru/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Michel_1_15_1.pdf (In Russ.)

17. Pykhtin A., Klevtsova M., Ovchinkin O., Zeveleva I. The concept of innovative system of enrollment in state universities of Russia. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences [internet]. 2015 [cited 2019 Apr 12]; 5 (1): 149-153. Available from: http://www.mcser.org/journal/index.php/mjss/article/view/7547/7229

18. Bolotov V. A., Kvelidze-Kuznetsova N. N., Laptev V. V., Morozova C. A. The h-Index in the Russian Science Citation Index. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies Moscow. 2014; 1: 241-262. (In Russ.)

19. Nurieva L. M., Kiselev S. G. The problems of measurement the higher professional education institutions efficiency. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Educati-on and Science Journal [Internet]. 2016; (4): 95-116. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2016-4-95-116 (In Russ.)

20. Prokhorov S. G., Svirina A. A., Chekhonadskikh A. I. Efficiency monitoring: An instrument for reduction or an engine for growth? Vysshee Obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2016; 1: 63-68. (In Russ.)

21. Nurieva L. M., Kiselev S. G. Results of the unified state exam: Experience of interregional comparisons. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal [Internet]. 2016; 10: 11-38. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2016-10-11-38 (In Russ.)

22. Nurieva L. M., Kiselev S. G. Average score of the unified state examination. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal [Internet]. 2017; 19 (6): 33-51. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2017-6-33- 51 (In Russ.)

23. Korf V. P. Estimating of Russian universities competitiveness using principal component analysis. Biznes-informatika = Business Informatics. 2014; 2 (28): 63-70. (In Russ.)