Pub Date : 2023-03-27DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.12
Vladimir Gerasimov, S. Kodaneva
Taking into account the challenges facing Russian science and industry related to changing geopolitical and macroeconomic conditions, the formation of new areas of scientific and innovative cooperation, the search for new partners and building ties with scientific organizations and business in the BRICS countries are of particular relevance. A wide range of issues related to the development of scientific, technological and innovative cooperation between the BRICS countries was discussed in October 2022 on the conference, which was attended by representatives of science, business and government of the BRICS countries.
{"title":"Scientific, Technological and Innovative Cooperation of the BRICS Countries: Trends, Prospects and Challenges","authors":"Vladimir Gerasimov, S. Kodaneva","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.12","url":null,"abstract":"Taking into account the challenges facing Russian science and industry related to changing geopolitical and macroeconomic conditions, the formation of new areas of scientific and innovative cooperation, the search for new partners and building ties with scientific organizations and business in the BRICS countries are of particular relevance. A wide range of issues related to the development of scientific, technological and innovative cooperation between the BRICS countries was discussed in October 2022 on the conference, which was attended by representatives of science, business and government of the BRICS countries.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"282 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123059058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-27DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.13
S. Egerev
The book by the famous British mediaevalist Peter Burke is perhaps the first detailed historical study of the phenomenon of versatile giftedness. The review notes the importance of the monograph. P. Burke has collected unique historical material about researchers of different centuries, who had wide interests and worked in interdisciplinary directions. It is shown that the information crises that have arisen in society throughout history were changing the practice of interaction between generalists and narrow scholars. An important observation about the convergence of the roles of polymaths and specialists in the course of scientific and technological development of society is made. The book is addressed to all those interested in the general history of science and the social history of the scientific community.
{"title":"A Scholar between Versatility and Specialization. Review of the Book by Peter Burke “The Polymath: A Cultural History from Leonardo da Vinci to Susan Sontag”","authors":"S. Egerev","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.13","url":null,"abstract":"The book by the famous British mediaevalist Peter Burke is perhaps the first detailed historical study of the phenomenon of versatile giftedness. The review notes the importance of the monograph. P. Burke has collected unique historical material about researchers of different centuries, who had wide interests and worked in interdisciplinary directions. It is shown that the information crises that have arisen in society throughout history were changing the practice of interaction between generalists and narrow scholars. An important observation about the convergence of the roles of polymaths and specialists in the course of scientific and technological development of society is made. The book is addressed to all those interested in the general history of science and the social history of the scientific community.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"25 22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125765590","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-27DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.10
V. Vizgin
The article is both scientific autobiography of a professional historian of physics who has worked at the S. I. Vavilov Institute for the History of Science and Technology of the RAS (IHST RAS) for more than half a century, and a reflection of the history of research in the field of the history of physics at the IHST RAS during this time. The author identifies a sequence of turning points associated with his most important works and changes in research topics. His research on the history of the principles of symmetry, the theory of relativity, unified field theories, the social history of Russian physics, and also on the history of the Soviet atomic project are considered. The connection between the history of science and the philosophy of science, which the author taught postgraduate students of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, is also discussed. Particular attention is paid to the author's teachers and his meetings with prominent scientists (science historians, physicists, philosophers), including foreign ones. The article also tells about the scientific and organizational work of the author (leading the sector of physics and mechanics history, related Moscow-wide seminars and seminars on history of the Soviet atomic project), in particular, and about mistakes and missed opportunities in this area. In conclusion, some features and problems of the development of the history of physics and historical and scientific research in general are formulated in the form of “history lessons”.
{"title":"Sketches for a Scientific Autobiography","authors":"V. Vizgin","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.10","url":null,"abstract":"The article is both scientific autobiography of a professional historian of physics who has worked at the S. I. Vavilov Institute for the History of Science and Technology of the RAS (IHST RAS) for more than half a century, and a reflection of the history of research in the field of the history of physics at the IHST RAS during this time. The author identifies a sequence of turning points associated with his most important works and changes in research topics. His research on the history of the principles of symmetry, the theory of relativity, unified field theories, the social history of Russian physics, and also on the history of the Soviet atomic project are considered. The connection between the history of science and the philosophy of science, which the author taught postgraduate students of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, is also discussed. Particular attention is paid to the author's teachers and his meetings with prominent scientists (science historians, physicists, philosophers), including foreign ones. The article also tells about the scientific and organizational work of the author (leading the sector of physics and mechanics history, related Moscow-wide seminars and seminars on history of the Soviet atomic project), in particular, and about mistakes and missed opportunities in this area. In conclusion, some features and problems of the development of the history of physics and historical and scientific research in general are formulated in the form of “history lessons”.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"226 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121480533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-27DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.8
D. Romanov, Alexander Gerashchenko, V. Shaposhnikov
The purpose of the study is to identify and substantiate the criteria for synergistic interaction of employees within the research team. The object of research is the scientific activity of micro–collectives (department collectives), the subject of research is the success of cooperation within collectives. Scientific cooperation is an important factor in increasing the success (efficiency) of research activities and obtaining high-quality scientific results. Efficiency of any activity, including research activity, is increased by means of synergistic interaction (the results of which can be presented as 1 + 1> 2). The authors consider synergistic interaction as a way of performing research activities by scientific teams based on cooperation as a factor in obtainingresults impossible without this interaction. The parameters reflecting the synergism of the research activities of scientific teams are its criteria as the subject of the specified activity (first of all, organizational readiness). Taking into account these parameters, the analysis of research activity results (reflected in publication activity and citation rate) achieved by academic researchers from higher educational institutions of the Krasnodar Territory (one of the federal subjects of Russia) is performed. The authors present their models and methods for the assessment of synergistic interaction within scientific teams. Primary mathematical modelsbased on set theory are proposed for the scientific team and its activities. Some difficulties in assessing the synergism of scientific teams – the impossibility to accurately assess the rating of scientific publications, malfunction of automated scientometric databases, problems with identifying the specific contribution of each author’s specific contribution, faked scientific activity, retraction of publications – are noted. Methodological foundations of the research: synergetic approach (considers scientific cooperation as a synergistic process leading to an increase in the effectiveness of research activities), systematic approach (considers the diagnosis of scientific cooperation as an integral component of monitoring research activities), sociological approach (considers the research team as a social system and environment for a researcher), qualimetric approach (proclaims the need for multi-criteria diagnostics of synergistic interaction within a research team) and probabilistic-statistical approach (considers the diagnosis of scientific cooperation as a statistical measurement based on the processing of primary information). Research methods: analysis of scientific literature, modeling, methods of set theory and graphs, methods of qualimetry, methods of mathematical statistics, including the method of rocky scree, on the basis of which the well-known Hirsch index iscalculated, methods of linear algebra.
{"title":"Synergism of Scientific Teams in the Reflection of Scientometrics","authors":"D. Romanov, Alexander Gerashchenko, V. Shaposhnikov","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2023.5.1.8","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the study is to identify and substantiate the criteria for synergistic interaction of employees within the research team. The object of research is the scientific activity of micro–collectives (department collectives), the subject of research is the success of cooperation within collectives. Scientific cooperation is an important factor in increasing the success (efficiency) of research activities and obtaining high-quality scientific results. Efficiency of any activity, including research activity, is increased by means of synergistic interaction (the results of which can be presented as 1 + 1> 2). The authors consider synergistic interaction as a way of performing research activities by scientific teams based on cooperation as a factor in obtainingresults impossible without this interaction. The parameters reflecting the synergism of the research activities of scientific teams are its criteria as the subject of the specified activity (first of all, organizational readiness). Taking into account these parameters, the analysis of research activity results (reflected in publication activity and citation rate) achieved by academic researchers from higher educational institutions of the Krasnodar Territory (one of the federal subjects of Russia) is performed. The authors present their models and methods for the assessment of synergistic interaction within scientific teams. Primary mathematical modelsbased on set theory are proposed for the scientific team and its activities. Some difficulties in assessing the synergism of scientific teams – the impossibility to accurately assess the rating of scientific publications, malfunction of automated scientometric databases, problems with identifying the specific contribution of each author’s specific contribution, faked scientific activity, retraction of publications – are noted. Methodological foundations of the research: synergetic approach (considers scientific cooperation as a synergistic process leading to an increase in the effectiveness of research activities), systematic approach (considers the diagnosis of scientific cooperation as an integral component of monitoring research activities), sociological approach (considers the research team as a social system and environment for a researcher), qualimetric approach (proclaims the need for multi-criteria diagnostics of synergistic interaction within a research team) and probabilistic-statistical approach (considers the diagnosis of scientific cooperation as a statistical measurement based on the processing of primary information). Research methods: analysis of scientific literature, modeling, methods of set theory and graphs, methods of qualimetry, methods of mathematical statistics, including the method of rocky scree, on the basis of which the well-known Hirsch index iscalculated, methods of linear algebra.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134361747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-26DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.5
A. Serebriakov
The legal regulation of science in Russia today is imperfect. This is especially noticeable in the example of the legal regimes of the results of scientific and technological activities. Neither domestic legislation nor scientific doctrine offers a detailed classification of such results. At the same time, the solution of the issue of effective protection of the rights of scientists to the results of their intellectual activity depends on this. The purpose of this work is to highlight and analyze the existing types of results of scientific and research activities from the point of view of the prospects for their legal protection. To achieve this goal, different methods were used. The comparative analysis made it possible to show the differences between different types of results of scientific and scientific and technical activities. The formal legal method made it possible to assess the state of Russian legislation in terms of regulating relations regarding the creation of the results of scientific and technical activities. As well as a comparative legal method, the application of which made it possible to evaluate international and foreign experience in regulating issues related to the legal regimes of scientific research results. The author proposes several classifications of the results of scientific and scientific and technical activities, using such criteria as the form of expression and content of such a result (results that are intellectual property and results that cannot be granted the intellectual property regime), as well as the sequence of creating the results of scientific and scientific and technical activities (primary and secondary results). The question is raised about the expediency of fixing provisions in domestic law that reflect the content of the concept of open science. In addition, proposals were formulated to improve Russian legislation in terms of introducing measures to increase the effectiveness of protecting the rights of subjects of scientific and scientific and technical activities to the results of research and development.
{"title":"The Results of Scientific and Technological Activities: Possibility of Legal Protection","authors":"A. Serebriakov","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.5","url":null,"abstract":"The legal regulation of science in Russia today is imperfect. This is especially noticeable in the example of the legal regimes of the results of scientific and technological activities. Neither domestic legislation nor scientific doctrine offers a detailed classification of such results. At the same time, the solution of the issue of effective protection of the rights of scientists to the results of their intellectual activity depends on this. The purpose of this work is to highlight and analyze the existing types of results of scientific and research activities from the point of view of the prospects for their legal protection. To achieve this goal, different methods were used. The comparative analysis made it possible to show the differences between different types of results of scientific and scientific and technical activities. The formal legal method made it possible to assess the state of Russian legislation in terms of regulating relations regarding the creation of the results of scientific and technical activities. As well as a comparative legal method, the application of which made it possible to evaluate international and foreign experience in regulating issues related to the legal regimes of scientific research results. The author proposes several classifications of the results of scientific and scientific and technical activities, using such criteria as the form of expression and content of such a result (results that are intellectual property and results that cannot be granted the intellectual property regime), as well as the sequence of creating the results of scientific and scientific and technical activities (primary and secondary results). The question is raised about the expediency of fixing provisions in domestic law that reflect the content of the concept of open science. In addition, proposals were formulated to improve Russian legislation in terms of introducing measures to increase the effectiveness of protecting the rights of subjects of scientific and scientific and technical activities to the results of research and development.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123925370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-26DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.15
O. Shelegina
In the context of the great challenges of our time, scientific heritage has an urgent and resource value for the development of science, taking into account the public needs for its socio-cultural communication and personalization. The historical experience of the organization and management of science through the prism of the activities of outstanding scientists of Russia – the founders of academic institutions at the Novosibirsk Scientific Center (NSC) of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the late 1950s. Its results and prospects are summarized in the monograph N. Kuperstokh, I. Kraineva “The institutes of the Novosibirsk Scientific Centerare named after them”. Using the example of 14 named institutes, the authors analyzed the role of leading scientists in the formation of new scientific directions for Siberia in the fields of mathematics, computer science, mechanics and energy, physics, chemistry, biology, geology. The book reveals the specifics of the organization of research in each field of knowledge. The naming of the first directors to the institutes of the NSC testifies to their expedient time and perspective vision of scientific directions, which in the XXI century are implemented by their students and followers. A new approach to the study in historical dynamics of the role and influence of the scientific heritage of leaders in the context of socio–cultural space shouldbe developed in relation to other scientific centers of Siberia – Tomsk, Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk, Yakutsk, adapted to the project “Akademgorodok 2.0”.
在我们这个时代面临巨大挑战的背景下，考虑到公众对社会文化交流和个性化的需求，科学遗产对科学的发展具有紧迫的资源价值。通过俄罗斯杰出科学家活动的棱镜组织和管理科学的历史经验- 20世纪50年代末苏联科学院新西伯利亚科学中心(NSC)学术机构的创始人。其结果和前景总结在专著N. Kuperstokh, I. Kraineva“新西伯利亚科学中心的研究所以他们的名字命名”。作者以14个被点名的研究所为例，分析了顶尖科学家在数学、计算机科学、力学和能源、物理、化学、生物、地质等领域为西伯利亚形成新的科学方向所起的作用。这本书揭示了每个知识领域的研究组织的具体情况。国家安全委员会研究所的第一批主任的任命证明了他们对科学方向的有利时机和远见卓识，这些在21世纪由他们的学生和追随者实施。在社会文化空间背景下，应该与西伯利亚的其他科学中心——托木斯克、克拉斯诺亚尔斯克、伊尔库茨克、雅库茨克——开发一种新的方法来研究领导者的科学遗产的作用和影响的历史动态，适应“学术戈罗多克2.0”项目。
{"title":"In the interests of the State and Society: the Scientific Heritage of the founders of Siberian Academic Institutions. Review of the Book by N. Kupershtokh, I. Kraineva “Institutes of the Novosibirsk Scientific Center are Named after Them”","authors":"O. Shelegina","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.15","url":null,"abstract":"In the context of the great challenges of our time, scientific heritage has an urgent and resource value for the development of science, taking into account the public needs for its socio-cultural communication and personalization. The historical experience of the organization and management of science through the prism of the activities of outstanding scientists of Russia – the founders of academic institutions at the Novosibirsk Scientific Center (NSC) of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the late 1950s. Its results and prospects are summarized in the monograph N. Kuperstokh, I. Kraineva “The institutes of the Novosibirsk Scientific Centerare named after them”. Using the example of 14 named institutes, the authors analyzed the role of leading scientists in the formation of new scientific directions for Siberia in the fields of mathematics, computer science, mechanics and energy, physics, chemistry, biology, geology. The book reveals the specifics of the organization of research in each field of knowledge. The naming of the first directors to the institutes of the NSC testifies to their expedient time and perspective vision of scientific directions, which in the XXI century are implemented by their students and followers. A new approach to the study in historical dynamics of the role and influence of the scientific heritage of leaders in the context of socio–cultural space shouldbe developed in relation to other scientific centers of Siberia – Tomsk, Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk, Yakutsk, adapted to the project “Akademgorodok 2.0”.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125357542","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-26DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.13
E. Grunt, E. Belyaeva, M. Valeeva
Educational interaction between Russia and the SCO countries has a long cultural and historical experience. The practice of such interaction is becoming more and more evident in obtaining more support and interest in the education system in Russia and the SCO countries. The modern social reality referring to the pandemic, changes in the geopolitical space of the world dictate new requirements for the formation of educational interaction models between the SCO countries. The trend of Russia’s refusal to participate in the Bologna process is also becoming one of the main directions of Russian educational policy. The major research objectives were to study the barriers that hinder the development of interaction between the SCOcountries in the educational space, to identify the advantages, disadvantages and problems of its implementation. The research methodology combined both quantitative and qualitative approaches. The primary data was collected using questionnaires (n= 560) and in-depth interviews (n=50). Students from the SCO countries studying at universities in Yekaterinburg (Russia) took part in the quantitative study The in-depth interviews with experts were conducted in order to identify key issues of educational interaction between the SCO countries. The research has investigated a number of barriers that prevent fruitful educational interactionbetween the universities of the SCO countries. They are as follows: objective circumstances of constantly changing geopolitical realities, technical difficulties in the implementation of educational interaction, insufficient readiness of the teaching staff to teach foreign students, financial risks, language barrier, cultural barrier, unfavourable infrastructure of universities, the specifics of educational programs and curricula. Our research has identified factors that will contribute to the development of educational interaction and overcoming barriers. They are as follows: personal factors, motivation to get education in Russian universities, the historically established cultural tradition of communication between the peoples of the SCO countries, the creation of uniform educational standards and organizations (similar to the SCO university).The study has identified barriers that prevent this interaction. They are as follows: objective circumstances of constantly changing geopolitical realities, technical difficulties in the implementation of educational interaction, insufficient readiness of the teaching staff to teach foreign students, financial risks, language barrier, cultural barrier, unfavourable infrastructure of universities, the specifics of educational programs and curricula. The study has revealed factors that promote the development of educational interaction and overcome barriers. They include: personal factors, motivation to get education in Russian universities, the historically established cultural tradition of communication between the peoples of the SCO countries,the creation of
{"title":"Yekaterinburg Universities and SCO Countries Educational Space: Barriers and Risks","authors":"E. Grunt, E. Belyaeva, M. Valeeva","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.13","url":null,"abstract":"Educational interaction between Russia and the SCO countries has a long cultural and historical experience. The practice of such interaction is becoming more and more evident in obtaining more support and interest in the education system in Russia and the SCO countries. The modern social reality referring to the pandemic, changes in the geopolitical space of the world dictate new requirements for the formation of educational interaction models between the SCO countries. The trend of Russia’s refusal to participate in the Bologna process is also becoming one of the main directions of Russian educational policy. The major research objectives were to study the barriers that hinder the development of interaction between the SCOcountries in the educational space, to identify the advantages, disadvantages and problems of its implementation. The research methodology combined both quantitative and qualitative approaches. The primary data was collected using questionnaires (n= 560) and in-depth interviews (n=50). Students from the SCO countries studying at universities in Yekaterinburg (Russia) took part in the quantitative study The in-depth interviews with experts were conducted in order to identify key issues of educational interaction between the SCO countries. The research has investigated a number of barriers that prevent fruitful educational interactionbetween the universities of the SCO countries. They are as follows: objective circumstances of constantly changing geopolitical realities, technical difficulties in the implementation of educational interaction, insufficient readiness of the teaching staff to teach foreign students, financial risks, language barrier, cultural barrier, unfavourable infrastructure of universities, the specifics of educational programs and curricula. Our research has identified factors that will contribute to the development of educational interaction and overcoming barriers. They are as follows: personal factors, motivation to get education in Russian universities, the historically established cultural tradition of communication between the peoples of the SCO countries, the creation of uniform educational standards and organizations (similar to the SCO university).The study has identified barriers that prevent this interaction. They are as follows: objective circumstances of constantly changing geopolitical realities, technical difficulties in the implementation of educational interaction, insufficient readiness of the teaching staff to teach foreign students, financial risks, language barrier, cultural barrier, unfavourable infrastructure of universities, the specifics of educational programs and curricula. The study has revealed factors that promote the development of educational interaction and overcome barriers. They include: personal factors, motivation to get education in Russian universities, the historically established cultural tradition of communication between the peoples of the SCO countries,the creation of","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123008214","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-26DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.16
A. Ablazhey
The article deals with the main problems of the modern stage of the development of education, raised in the book by G. Lyubarsky. First of all, we are talking about the ideas, if not myths, of the mass consciousness about education, which often do not correspond to reality. In modern society, and Russian education is no exception, education, including higher education, has essentially disappeared. Only its formal institutions survived. Among the reasons is the increasingly fragmented nature of the knowledge gained, the transformation of the very process of education into entertainment, since today it should be, first of all, interesting. Describing the field of scientific research, the author of the book comes to the conclusionthat the notorious media coverage has also played its negative role here, tearing the unified field of science apart and hindering scientific research in those areas and disciplines that do not promise a quick media or commercial effect. Science has become just one of the ways of intellectual production, but not everyone is ready to accept this new reality. The role of the university as an institution for the transmission of culture has also been eroded.
{"title":"Once Again of Education... Book review by G. Yu. Lyubarsky “Education of the Future. University Myth and the Structure of Opinions on Education in the 21st Century”","authors":"A. Ablazhey","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.16","url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with the main problems of the modern stage of the development of education, raised in the book by G. Lyubarsky. First of all, we are talking about the ideas, if not myths, of the mass consciousness about education, which often do not correspond to reality. In modern society, and Russian education is no exception, education, including higher education, has essentially disappeared. Only its formal institutions survived. Among the reasons is the increasingly fragmented nature of the knowledge gained, the transformation of the very process of education into entertainment, since today it should be, first of all, interesting. Describing the field of scientific research, the author of the book comes to the conclusionthat the notorious media coverage has also played its negative role here, tearing the unified field of science apart and hindering scientific research in those areas and disciplines that do not promise a quick media or commercial effect. Science has become just one of the ways of intellectual production, but not everyone is ready to accept this new reality. The role of the university as an institution for the transmission of culture has also been eroded.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127749107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-26DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.6
V. Volchik
For the development of the national innovation system, it is necessary to meet three fundamental conditions: economic and political stability, entrepreneurial initiative, and increasing returns. The article examines what problems in the Russian innovation system are associated with mechanisms of increasing returns. An increasing return in this paper is a class of social (economic) interactions with positive feedback that allow you to benefit from the expansion of the scale of activity. The modern world of increasing returns is connected not onlywith the development of technologies but also with institutions and regulatory mechanisms. The article develops the narrative economics’ approach to analysing the Russian innovationsystem and the mechanisms of increasing returns. Narratives contained in 27 in-depth interviewsof representatives of the academic sphere related to innovation activities are used as data sources. The research highlights the main problems of the Russian innovation system related to the mechanisms of increasing returns. Among such issues, the author identified: a violation of consistency in the interactions of various elements and actors of innovation, weak demand for innovation from business, underdevelopment of physical and institutional infrastructure for innovation, failures in the development and implementation of public policy in the field of innovation, problems with attracting financing for innovative development andtheir implementation, lack of qualified personnel and failures in the system of their reproduction.The use of qualitative methods makes it possible not only to identify relevant problems of the Russian innovation system for actors but also to take a step towards developing a more comprehensive understanding of the state of functions and dysfunctions of existing regulatory mechanisms and institutions.
{"title":"Increasing Return and Russian Innovation System","authors":"V. Volchik","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.6","url":null,"abstract":"For the development of the national innovation system, it is necessary to meet three fundamental conditions: economic and political stability, entrepreneurial initiative, and increasing returns. The article examines what problems in the Russian innovation system are associated with mechanisms of increasing returns. An increasing return in this paper is a class of social (economic) interactions with positive feedback that allow you to benefit from the expansion of the scale of activity. The modern world of increasing returns is connected not onlywith the development of technologies but also with institutions and regulatory mechanisms. The article develops the narrative economics’ approach to analysing the Russian innovationsystem and the mechanisms of increasing returns. Narratives contained in 27 in-depth interviewsof representatives of the academic sphere related to innovation activities are used as data sources. The research highlights the main problems of the Russian innovation system related to the mechanisms of increasing returns. Among such issues, the author identified: a violation of consistency in the interactions of various elements and actors of innovation, weak demand for innovation from business, underdevelopment of physical and institutional infrastructure for innovation, failures in the development and implementation of public policy in the field of innovation, problems with attracting financing for innovative development andtheir implementation, lack of qualified personnel and failures in the system of their reproduction.The use of qualitative methods makes it possible not only to identify relevant problems of the Russian innovation system for actors but also to take a step towards developing a more comprehensive understanding of the state of functions and dysfunctions of existing regulatory mechanisms and institutions.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121981518","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-26DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.1
V. Rakin
The executive power of our country, by the statement of Deputy Prime Minister D. Chernyshenko on March 7, 2022, recognized that the current system of management of domestic science does not meet the national interests of Russia. The concept of open science implies not only open access to the latest achievements of world science, which can be achieved with the development of modern means of communication, but also the fulfillment of a number of principles of honest scientific research. One can agree that easy access to theresults of domestic scientific research may be contrary to the national interest of the country. But this problem is probably quite solvable through scientific and technological expertise at the stage of preparing material for publication. The main problem, in our opinion, is related to the fact that numerous scientometric indicators of “successful” scientific work transform the creative research process into an operational type of intellectual activity. In our opinion, the problem of the examination of a scientist’s scientific activity should be reconsidered. The purpose of expertise should be to assess the quality of scientific work: the personal contribution to the scientific problem being developed; reliability and sufficiency of the data obtained andfor the conclusions formulated; reproducibility of observation results; absence of plagiarism and duplication of publications; depth of understanding of the scientific problem; degree of involvement of the researcher in the creative work of the whole scientific team within a given scientific or technological topic. Only examination of the attitude to creative scientific work within the framework of periodic certification process can prevent domestic science from becoming just a means of earning money.
{"title":"Open Science in Russia or the Enforcement of Scientific Creativity","authors":"V. Rakin","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2022.4.4.1","url":null,"abstract":"The executive power of our country, by the statement of Deputy Prime Minister D. Chernyshenko on March 7, 2022, recognized that the current system of management of domestic science does not meet the national interests of Russia. The concept of open science implies not only open access to the latest achievements of world science, which can be achieved with the development of modern means of communication, but also the fulfillment of a number of principles of honest scientific research. One can agree that easy access to theresults of domestic scientific research may be contrary to the national interest of the country. But this problem is probably quite solvable through scientific and technological expertise at the stage of preparing material for publication. The main problem, in our opinion, is related to the fact that numerous scientometric indicators of “successful” scientific work transform the creative research process into an operational type of intellectual activity. In our opinion, the problem of the examination of a scientist’s scientific activity should be reconsidered. The purpose of expertise should be to assess the quality of scientific work: the personal contribution to the scientific problem being developed; reliability and sufficiency of the data obtained andfor the conclusions formulated; reproducibility of observation results; absence of plagiarism and duplication of publications; depth of understanding of the scientific problem; degree of involvement of the researcher in the creative work of the whole scientific team within a given scientific or technological topic. Only examination of the attitude to creative scientific work within the framework of periodic certification process can prevent domestic science from becoming just a means of earning money.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130966047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：