Implementation of international norms in Russia: the case of higher education

W. Streeck”s and K. Thelen's [41] typology of results and processes correlates the process of change (incremental or abrupt) with the result of change (continuity or discontinuity) and reveals four typical kinds of outcome. Incremental change in a logic of continuity results in reproduction by adaptation, while abrupt change in a logic of continuity results in survival and return and, hence, a failure of the adopted policy. This typology sheds a light on the Russian case, as the government chose the strategy of abrupt change and according to the matrix, a positive outcome is only possible if the changes take place in a logic of discontinuity, leading to the breakdown and replacement of the current educational system. However, the government does not aim for discontinuity, as it does not want the breakdown of the existing system and its replacement by a new one as this unavoidably presents some security and reputational risks. This typology reveals that abrupt change and continuity, which characterize the current policies, are incompatible. The threat of disturbing the current, very fragile equilibrium in higher education is to be weighed against the potential advantages of becoming a more active member of the global network of universities. In order to implement these innovations, an indepth analysis of their potential impact on the substance of education needs to be carried out. Specifically, following the full execution of the project, what will a Russian Bachelor in political science or biology have learnt? Who will he/ she aspire to work for and where? What is more, importing foreign norms without the know-how related to their implementation can be counterproductive. While Transnational Expertise and Experience Networks can play the role of a catalyst and facilitator in norm implementation by raising social and state awareness about the norms and by aiding in the adaptation of international norms to local conditions [9], more thought should go into selecting the parts of the international integration process of higher education that Russia wishes to take part in, those it would require more time to adjust to, or, finally, those, it would rather avoid.

References

1. Smolentseva, A., Huisman, J., Froumin, I. (2018). Transformation of Higher Education Institutional Landscape in Post-Soviet Countries: From Soviet Model to Where? In: 25 Years of Transformations of Higher Education Systems in Post-Soviet Countries. Palgrave Studies in Global Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 1-45.

2. Tulokhonov, A.K. (2014). [The Mountain Gave Birth to a Mouse, or Once Again about the Reform of the RAS]. Vserossiiskiy ekonomicheskiy zhurnal EKO = All-Russian ECO Journal. Vol. 44, no. 7, pp.158-163. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).

3. Dezhina, I. (2014). Russia's Academy of Sciences' Reform: Causes and Consequences for Russian Science. Russie. Nei. Visions. Vol. 77, pp. 1-27.

4. Graham, L.R. (2015). The Soviet Academy of Sciences and the Communist Party, 1927-1932. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 276 p.

5. Byzov, L.G. (2018). Conservative Trends in Contemporary Russian Society: Origins, Content, and Prospects. Russian Social Science Review. No. 59(1), pp. 39-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.10 80/10611428.2018.1424441.

6. Davies, R.W., Davies, R.W., Harrison, M., Wheat- croft, S.G. (Eds.). (1994). The Economic Transformation of the Soviet Union, 1913-1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 381 p.

7. Moutsios, S. (2012). Academic Autonomy and the Bologna Process. Working Papers on University Reform. Copenhagen: EPOKE, Department ofEducation, Aarhus University. 56 p.

8. Keck, M., Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond Borders. Transnational Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 240 p.

9. Vigneau, A., Baykov, A. (2019). Transnational Networks and Russia's Environmental Policies. Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy = International Trends. Vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 137-153. DOI: 10.17994/IT.2018.16.4.55.8 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).

10. Meyer, J.W., Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 340-363.

11. DiMaggio, P.J., Powell, W.W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review. Vol. 48, pp. 147-160.

12. Krause, P. (2013). Of Institutions and Butterflies: Is Isomorphism in Developing Countries Necessarily a Bad Thing. Background Note: The Overseas Development Institute, pp. 1-4. Available at: https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi- assets/publications-opinion-files/8353.pdf.

13. Shields, R. (2015). Measurement and Isomorphism in International Education. In: Hayden, M., Levy, J., Tompson, J. (Eds). The SAGE Handbook of Research in International Education. London: SAGE Publ., pp. 477-488.

14. Finnemore, M. (1993). International Organizations as Teachers of Norms: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and Science Policy. International organization. Vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 565-597.

15. Meyer, J.W. (1992). The Global Standardisation of National Educational Systems. Nagoya University Publ., 32 p.

16. Schofer, E., Hironaka, A., Frank, D.J., Long-hofer, W. (2012). Sociological institutionalism and world society. In: Amenta E., Nash, K., Scott, A. The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology, New York: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 5768.

17. Pritchett, L., Woolcock, M., Andrews, M. (2010). Capability Traps? The Mechanisms of Persistent Implementation Failure. Center for Global Development Working Paper. Washington, D.C.: Center for Global Development, 234 p.

18. Kasatkin, P.I., Silantieva, M.V. (2017). The Anthropological Aspect of Global Education Models: Problems and Solutions. Polis. Politichesk.- ie Issledovaniya = Polis. Political Science. No. 6, pp. 137-149. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).

19. Elutin, V.P. (1980). Vysshaya shkola obschestva razvitogo sotsializma [Higher Education of the Society ofDeveloped Socialism]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 587 p. (In Russ.).

20. Zajda, J. (2003). Educational Reform and Transformation in Russia: Why Education Reforms Fail. European Education. Vol. 35, no 1, pp. 5888.

21. Gounko, T., Smale, W. (2007). Modernization of Russian Higher Education: Exploring Paths of Influence. Compare. Vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 533-548.

22. Dewey, J. (2004). Democracy and Education. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 368 p.

23. Bloom, A. (2008). Closing of the American mind. New York: Simon and Schuster Paperbacks.

24. Torres, C.A. (2002). Globalization, Education, and Citizenship: Solidarity Versus Markets? American Educational Research Journal. Vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 363-378.

25. Kasatkin, P.I., Kovalchuk, Yu.A., Stepanov, I.M. (2019). The Modern Universities Role in the Formation of the Digital Wave of Kondratiev's Long Cycles. Voprosy ekonomiki. No. 12, pp. 123-140. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).

26. Chernyshov, S. (2007). Rossiya suverennaya: kak zarabotat vmeste so stranoy [Sovereign Russia: How It Is Possible to Make a Profit Together with the Country]. Moscow: Evropa Publ., 304 p. (In Russ.).

27. Kuraev, A. (2014). Internationalization of Higher Education in Russia: Collapse or Perpetuation of the Soviet System? A Historical and Conceptual Study. Doct. Sci. Thesis, Boston College, Newton MA, 332 p.

28. Kortunov, A.V. (2010). [Global Management: International Institutions, Models, Legislation]. In: Konferentsiya “Strategicheskie tsennosti i politicheskaya struktura Evro-Antlanticheskoi bezopasnosti“ [Strategic Values and Political Structure Security in the Euro-Atlantic Region: Proc. Sci. Conf.] Moscow: MGIMO University Publ., pp. 30-39. (In Russ.)

29. Kawito, M., Gounko, T., Nungy, M. (2014). Comparative Analysis of Higher Education Systems. Issues, Challenges, and Dilemmas. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 42 p.

30. Kasatkin, P.I., Ivkina, N.V. (2018). Cultural and Educational Dimensions of EU Soft Power. Sravnitelnaya politika = Comparative Politics Russia. Vol. 9, no. 1. DOI: https://doi. org/10.24411/2221-3279-2018-00003 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).

31. Naumenko, E.E. (2016). [Adaptation of “Project 5-100” to the Russian Educational System]. Vest- nik Kemerovskogo Gosudarstvennogo Univer- siteta Kultury i Iskusstv = Bulletin of Kemerovo State University of Culture and Arts. No. 35, pp. 176-182. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).

32. Pursiainen, C., Medvedev, S. (Eds). (2005). The Bologna Process and Its Implications for Russia: The European Integration of Higher Education. Moscow: Russian-European Centre for Economic Policy, pp. 16-24. (In Russ.).

33. Motova, G.N. (2018). Doubled Standards of the Quality Assurance: Russia in the Bologna Process. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia,. Vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 9-21. (In Russ., abstract in Eng).

34. Senashenko, V.S., Makarova, A.A. (2020). On the Hybrid Nature of Reforming the Traditional Structure of Engineering Education. Univer- sitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz = University Management: Practice and Analysis. Vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 118-128. DOI: 10.15826/ umpa.2020.01.005 (In Russ., abstract in Eng.).

35. Mustajoki, A. (2013). Measuring Excellence in Social Sciences and Humanities: Limitations and Opportunities. In: Erkkila, T. (Ed). Global University Rankings: Challenges for European Higher Education. London: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 147-165.

36. Mussard, M., James, A.P. (2018). Engineering the Global University Rankings: Gold Standards, Limitations and Implications. IEEE Access, no. 6, 12 p. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2789326.

37. Stratilatis, C. (2014). University Rankings and the Scientification of Social Sciences and Humanities. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics. Vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 177-192.

38. Dimova, S., Hultgren, A.K., Jensen, C. (Eds). (2015). English-Medium Instruction in European Higher Education. Berlin, 334 p.

39. Mau, V., Drobyshevskaya, T. (2013). Modernization and the Russian Economy: Three Hundred Years of Catching Up. In: Alexeev, M., Weber, Sh. The Oxford Handbook of the Russian Economy. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, pp. 29-50.

40. Bogaturov, A.D., Vinogradov, A.V. (2002). Enclave-Conglomerate Type of Development. The Experience of Trans-System Theory. In: Vostok - Zapad - Rossiya [East-West-Russia: Collection of papers]. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya Publ., pp. 109-128. (In Russ.).

41. Streeck, W., Thelen, K. (2005). Introduction: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. In: Streeck, W., Thelen, K. Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1-39.

Размещено на Allbest.ru