Pub Date : 2018-09-02DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1598163
I. Shcheglova
Higher education around the world is undergoing serious transformations as a result of technological, social, and economic processes. Universities from various countries are trying to secure a competitive position for themselves on the international market for educational services. Currently thousands of universities from different countries are trying to enter the race to join the race for international rankings. In their quest to reach the top of the rankings some countries seek to follow the experience of other, more successful nations by adopting their “best” practices. It is not surprising that all countries wish to secure a prosperous future for themselves and take efforts to avoid remaining on the sidelines of world development. However, a factor such as culture or national mentality may undermine the strategies and transformation processes that are being developed. The goal of this study is to conduct a cross-cultural analysis of the academic engagement of students from Russian, Chinese, Japanese, American, and British universities and determine the role that cultural differences play in existing educational systems. The study sample consisted of 26,648 Bachelor’s students who were enrolled at universities in the United States, United Kingdom, China, Japan, and Russia during the 2016–2017 academic year. We used data from the “Student Experience in the Research University” (SERU) international research project to construct an index of student class involvement on the basis of a factor analysis. The results of our univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that students from Japanese, Chinese, American, British, and Russian universities demonstrate qualitatively different levels of academic involvement, which depends on the organization of the educational process as well as the cultural traditions of these countries. Thus, the Chinese students turned out to be the least engaged, since they were not required to actively participate in class discussions or to discuss additional questions related to the course with the instructor. Russian and American students demonstrated the highest level of engagement compared with other students from countries in the survey. The author emphasizes the need to take into account existing cultural aspects when developing educational strategies, interacting with foreign students in the classroom, as well as conducting comparative studies.
{"title":"A Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Academic Engagement of Students","authors":"I. Shcheglova","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1598163","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1598163","url":null,"abstract":"Higher education around the world is undergoing serious transformations as a result of technological, social, and economic processes. Universities from various countries are trying to secure a competitive position for themselves on the international market for educational services. Currently thousands of universities from different countries are trying to enter the race to join the race for international rankings. In their quest to reach the top of the rankings some countries seek to follow the experience of other, more successful nations by adopting their “best” practices. It is not surprising that all countries wish to secure a prosperous future for themselves and take efforts to avoid remaining on the sidelines of world development. However, a factor such as culture or national mentality may undermine the strategies and transformation processes that are being developed. The goal of this study is to conduct a cross-cultural analysis of the academic engagement of students from Russian, Chinese, Japanese, American, and British universities and determine the role that cultural differences play in existing educational systems. The study sample consisted of 26,648 Bachelor’s students who were enrolled at universities in the United States, United Kingdom, China, Japan, and Russia during the 2016–2017 academic year. We used data from the “Student Experience in the Research University” (SERU) international research project to construct an index of student class involvement on the basis of a factor analysis. The results of our univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that students from Japanese, Chinese, American, British, and Russian universities demonstrate qualitatively different levels of academic involvement, which depends on the organization of the educational process as well as the cultural traditions of these countries. Thus, the Chinese students turned out to be the least engaged, since they were not required to actively participate in class discussions or to discuss additional questions related to the course with the instructor. Russian and American students demonstrated the highest level of engagement compared with other students from countries in the survey. The author emphasizes the need to take into account existing cultural aspects when developing educational strategies, interacting with foreign students in the classroom, as well as conducting comparative studies.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"665 - 681"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1598163","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45495056","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 : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527163
T. Khavenson
The article investigates the quality of the answers given by school-age children in survey questionnaires. We present the results of a systematic review of studies dedicated to the socioeconomic status of the family. By answer quality, we mean the ability of children to correctly indicate the educational attainment and profession of their parents and the number of skipped questions. The article focuses on assessing school students’ responses about the level of education, profession, or form of employment of parents. We investigate the role that is played by the following traits of respondents: age, academic performance, and family composition. The review is based on 16 studies that were conducted between 1990 and 2015. The obtained results allow us to conclude that high school students are generally aware of the level of education and profession of their parents. Respondents’ answers can essentially be used as a basic source of information. At the same time, we must be careful about how we methodologically process the judgments of schoolchildren.
{"title":"The Quality of the Responses of Schoolchildren to Questions Concerning Family Socioeconomic Status","authors":"T. Khavenson","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527163","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527163","url":null,"abstract":"The article investigates the quality of the answers given by school-age children in survey questionnaires. We present the results of a systematic review of studies dedicated to the socioeconomic status of the family. By answer quality, we mean the ability of children to correctly indicate the educational attainment and profession of their parents and the number of skipped questions. The article focuses on assessing school students’ responses about the level of education, profession, or form of employment of parents. We investigate the role that is played by the following traits of respondents: age, academic performance, and family composition. The review is based on 16 studies that were conducted between 1990 and 2015. The obtained results allow us to conclude that high school students are generally aware of the level of education and profession of their parents. Respondents’ answers can essentially be used as a basic source of information. At the same time, we must be careful about how we methodologically process the judgments of schoolchildren.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"555 - 573"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527163","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48158692","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 : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527166
K. Poluyanova, K. Belousov, I. O. Kudryakov
The article discusses the main results of a survey that was conducted in 2016 by specialists in the Sociological Research Department of the St. Petersburg Publicly Funded Institution “Kontakt” City Center for Social Programs and the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency. The study surveyed teenagers and young adults who participated in the annual XIII Rally of Volunteer Movement Leaders in St. Petersburg.
{"title":"The Status of the Volunteer Movement in St. Petersburg (According to Data from a Study Conducted by the “Kontakt” City Center for Social Programs and the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency)","authors":"K. Poluyanova, K. Belousov, I. O. Kudryakov","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527166","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527166","url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses the main results of a survey that was conducted in 2016 by specialists in the Sociological Research Department of the St. Petersburg Publicly Funded Institution “Kontakt” City Center for Social Programs and the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency. The study surveyed teenagers and young adults who participated in the annual XIII Rally of Volunteer Movement Leaders in St. Petersburg.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"623 - 642"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527166","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43621095","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 : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527165
A. Nisskaya
Preschool education became a part of general K–11 education only very recently. This change has been documented, and it is reflected in the organization and funding of the preschool departments of schools. The welfare of preschool departments within community K–11 organizations depends on the number of parents that they are able to attract. However, one thing remains unclear: What do parents prioritize when they choose a preschool? Do they see preschool education as a stage of K–11 education? Is there anything in particular that parents require of preschool education, and if so, then what is it? A study of parent needs showed that most parents choose a preschool because of its convenient location. They believe that the main task of preschool education is to look after and care for their children. Parents are satisfied when the teacher takes a benevolent and individualized attitude to the child. We identify three groups of parents, which differ in terms of their reasons for choosing a preschool, goals, and satisfaction factors.
{"title":"What Modern Parents Think About Preschool Education","authors":"A. Nisskaya","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527165","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527165","url":null,"abstract":"Preschool education became a part of general K–11 education only very recently. This change has been documented, and it is reflected in the organization and funding of the preschool departments of schools. The welfare of preschool departments within community K–11 organizations depends on the number of parents that they are able to attract. However, one thing remains unclear: What do parents prioritize when they choose a preschool? Do they see preschool education as a stage of K–11 education? Is there anything in particular that parents require of preschool education, and if so, then what is it? A study of parent needs showed that most parents choose a preschool because of its convenient location. They believe that the main task of preschool education is to look after and care for their children. Parents are satisfied when the teacher takes a benevolent and individualized attitude to the child. We identify three groups of parents, which differ in terms of their reasons for choosing a preschool, goals, and satisfaction factors.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"601 - 622"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527165","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46311584","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 : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527164
N. Knyaginina, D. Yanbarisova
The study explores the main methods that are used to identify gifted students at both foreign and Russian schools: academic competitions, earned grades, the administration of special tests, and teacher opinions about the individual academic performance of their students. The authors note that none of the criteria are universally used insofar as it is impossible to provide a perfect formal measure of student talent that can identify students who think outside the box and have unique skills but who do poorly on standardized tests during the educational process. It is argued that to more effectively identify talented youth, we should use all of the methods taken as a whole without preferring any single approach to another one. The article also analyzes the main tools that are used to support talented students: scholarships and grants, preferential admission at universities, enrollment at special schools for gifted children and K–11 schools associated with universities, special classes, extracurricular studies and summer schools, and special centers for gifted children. Particular attention is paid to how special educational programs and methods for working with gifted children should be implemented at schools and to how teachers should work with parents and teacher assistants. The article provides a retrospective analysis of the measures that the Government of the Russian Federation has used since 1999 to identify and support gifted students. The authors conclude that the current laws that regulate this area are fairly contradictory. They frequently fail to specify the mechanisms that should be used to implement the provisions of the program documents.
{"title":"Supporting Talented Youth","authors":"N. Knyaginina, D. Yanbarisova","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527164","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527164","url":null,"abstract":"The study explores the main methods that are used to identify gifted students at both foreign and Russian schools: academic competitions, earned grades, the administration of special tests, and teacher opinions about the individual academic performance of their students. The authors note that none of the criteria are universally used insofar as it is impossible to provide a perfect formal measure of student talent that can identify students who think outside the box and have unique skills but who do poorly on standardized tests during the educational process. It is argued that to more effectively identify talented youth, we should use all of the methods taken as a whole without preferring any single approach to another one. The article also analyzes the main tools that are used to support talented students: scholarships and grants, preferential admission at universities, enrollment at special schools for gifted children and K–11 schools associated with universities, special classes, extracurricular studies and summer schools, and special centers for gifted children. Particular attention is paid to how special educational programs and methods for working with gifted children should be implemented at schools and to how teachers should work with parents and teacher assistants. The article provides a retrospective analysis of the measures that the Government of the Russian Federation has used since 1999 to identify and support gifted students. The authors conclude that the current laws that regulate this area are fairly contradictory. They frequently fail to specify the mechanisms that should be used to implement the provisions of the program documents.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"574 - 600"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527164","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47268459","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 : 2018-06-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527129
S. Polyakov, G. A. Stryukova, N. Krivtsova
The article describes the results of an interdisciplinary study of the daily professional activities of modern Russian teachers (homeroom teachers). We show that the absence of similar studies has created problems for understanding how innovative developments in modern Russian education are resisted in the classroom. The article analyzes how teachers perceive their professional actions when they organize class activities. We classify their in-class activities into two groups: those that call on students to more actively participate and those that encourage them to remain more passive. We describe these actions of the homeroom teacher, the structure of the research questionnaire, and the procedure that we used to validate it. We use various psychological methods to demonstrate the discrepancy between the expected and actual results of a large-scale sociological and educational study of homeroom teachers from 20 Russian regions. We study the prevalence of the “directional” and “cooperative” teaching styles in the modern classroom.
{"title":"The Everyday Professional Lives of Modern Homeroom Teachers","authors":"S. Polyakov, G. A. Stryukova, N. Krivtsova","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527129","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527129","url":null,"abstract":"The article describes the results of an interdisciplinary study of the daily professional activities of modern Russian teachers (homeroom teachers). We show that the absence of similar studies has created problems for understanding how innovative developments in modern Russian education are resisted in the classroom. The article analyzes how teachers perceive their professional actions when they organize class activities. We classify their in-class activities into two groups: those that call on students to more actively participate and those that encourage them to remain more passive. We describe these actions of the homeroom teacher, the structure of the research questionnaire, and the procedure that we used to validate it. We use various psychological methods to demonstrate the discrepancy between the expected and actual results of a large-scale sociological and educational study of homeroom teachers from 20 Russian regions. We study the prevalence of the “directional” and “cooperative” teaching styles in the modern classroom.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"506 - 519"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527129","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43315401","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 : 2018-06-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527132
A. Shchetinina
The article considers the problem of how a particular social lexicon related to the theme of bribery in Russia that was used in various linguistic contexts during various historical periods should be described. Such a study is needed due to the lack of a comprehensive description of the vocabulary of social relations, including institutional relations related to bribery [vzyatochnichestvo]. We show Russians have discussed this topic using words, idioms, non-idiomatic expressions, as well as proverbs. These lexemes reflect how native Russian speakers conceive of the social relations between citizens and members of the government. We discover 312 linguistic features that convey the seme “bribe” [vzyatka] and “bribery.” These features define the semantic structure of words that make up the lexical-semantic field of “bribery.” We develop an ideographic map that defines the structure and composition of this field. We have discovered that the semantic core of the field is the ideogram “custom of taking bribes” [obychay brat’ vzyatki]. Its key lexical manifestation is the noun “bribery.” We defend our interpretation of this phenomenon as a custom. We conduct an interpretative analysis of the contexts in which the lexical representations of this concept are used. On the basis of this analysis, we conclude that proverbs objectify the semantic components of the concept “custom,” including its identifying, regulatory, and other functions.
{"title":"“If You Don’t Grease a Palm, You’ll Go Nowhere”","authors":"A. Shchetinina","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527132","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527132","url":null,"abstract":"The article considers the problem of how a particular social lexicon related to the theme of bribery in Russia that was used in various linguistic contexts during various historical periods should be described. Such a study is needed due to the lack of a comprehensive description of the vocabulary of social relations, including institutional relations related to bribery [vzyatochnichestvo]. We show Russians have discussed this topic using words, idioms, non-idiomatic expressions, as well as proverbs. These lexemes reflect how native Russian speakers conceive of the social relations between citizens and members of the government. We discover 312 linguistic features that convey the seme “bribe” [vzyatka] and “bribery.” These features define the semantic structure of words that make up the lexical-semantic field of “bribery.” We develop an ideographic map that defines the structure and composition of this field. We have discovered that the semantic core of the field is the ideogram “custom of taking bribes” [obychay brat’ vzyatki]. Its key lexical manifestation is the noun “bribery.” We defend our interpretation of this phenomenon as a custom. We conduct an interpretative analysis of the contexts in which the lexical representations of this concept are used. On the basis of this analysis, we conclude that proverbs objectify the semantic components of the concept “custom,” including its identifying, regulatory, and other functions.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"536 - 554"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527132","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48858246","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 : 2018-06-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527125
Z. A. Dulatova, Y. S. Lapshina
The development of universal learning actions [universal’nye uchebnye deystviya] in logic is one of the most important tasks of education. This article explores logical problems as an effective tool for developing logical thinking and the underlying universal learning actions. We outline the basic principles of learning to solve logical problems. In particular, learning how to solve logical problems should consist of more than just learning a sequence of solution steps (an algorithm). It should primarily consist of learning logical principles, logical literacy, and the ability to express one’s thoughts as well as to analyze and present information. In the article, we consider the traditional table-based method of solving problems as an example. We propose a method for generating new logical problems.
{"title":"Logical Problems as a Means of Developing Cognitive Universal Learning Actions","authors":"Z. A. Dulatova, Y. S. Lapshina","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527125","url":null,"abstract":"The development of universal learning actions [universal’nye uchebnye deystviya] in logic is one of the most important tasks of education. This article explores logical problems as an effective tool for developing logical thinking and the underlying universal learning actions. We outline the basic principles of learning to solve logical problems. In particular, learning how to solve logical problems should consist of more than just learning a sequence of solution steps (an algorithm). It should primarily consist of learning logical principles, logical literacy, and the ability to express one’s thoughts as well as to analyze and present information. In the article, we consider the traditional table-based method of solving problems as an example. We propose a method for generating new logical problems.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"463 - 476"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527125","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59740123","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 : 2018-06-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527130
D. Popov, A. Strelnikova
This article studies the problem of the discrepancy between attained education and employment in Russia. Our research relies on the results of an international study of adult competencies (Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, or PIAAC) that measured the reading literacy and numeracy of working-age people using representative national samples. The test results of OECD countries demonstrate that there is a connection with the level of formal education. However, we observed several deviations from this general trend in Russia. An analysis has allowed us to identify three types of discrepancies. We discovered that there is no linear relationship between the level of formal education and measured literacy in Russia. Gains in competency slow down at the higher education level in Russia. At the same time, the literacy level that was observed at the lower educational stages was in line with what was observed in leading countries from around the world. It was discovered that a larger share of people with a low level of literacy occupy high-skilled jobs in Russia than in developed countries. When we assess the distribution of people with a particular formal education on the labor market in Russia, we see a picture that is very similar to what we can observe in the OECD countries. Apparently, this discrepancy has remained hidden because of the unreliability of the educational indicator of possessing a higher education degree. This indicator has been used as the main (and in most cases the only) factor in both sociological and economic studies that have been conducted in Russia. The third empirical finding of our study indicates that there is a correspondence between the importance assigned to measured literacy and possessing a higher education degree in the job placement process. In Russia, both factors seem to be significant, but measured literacy is more strongly correlated with the likelihood of being employed than possessing a formal degree. At the same time, the difference in income level among respondents with low and high rates of literacy in Russia is much less than in the OECD countries. We interpret the quantitative measurements in light of qualitative data from a research project that studied life trajectories.
{"title":"The Problem of the Discrepancy Between Work, Education, and Literacy in Russia","authors":"D. Popov, A. Strelnikova","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527130","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527130","url":null,"abstract":"This article studies the problem of the discrepancy between attained education and employment in Russia. Our research relies on the results of an international study of adult competencies (Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, or PIAAC) that measured the reading literacy and numeracy of working-age people using representative national samples. The test results of OECD countries demonstrate that there is a connection with the level of formal education. However, we observed several deviations from this general trend in Russia. An analysis has allowed us to identify three types of discrepancies. We discovered that there is no linear relationship between the level of formal education and measured literacy in Russia. Gains in competency slow down at the higher education level in Russia. At the same time, the literacy level that was observed at the lower educational stages was in line with what was observed in leading countries from around the world. It was discovered that a larger share of people with a low level of literacy occupy high-skilled jobs in Russia than in developed countries. When we assess the distribution of people with a particular formal education on the labor market in Russia, we see a picture that is very similar to what we can observe in the OECD countries. Apparently, this discrepancy has remained hidden because of the unreliability of the educational indicator of possessing a higher education degree. This indicator has been used as the main (and in most cases the only) factor in both sociological and economic studies that have been conducted in Russia. The third empirical finding of our study indicates that there is a correspondence between the importance assigned to measured literacy and possessing a higher education degree in the job placement process. In Russia, both factors seem to be significant, but measured literacy is more strongly correlated with the likelihood of being employed than possessing a formal degree. At the same time, the difference in income level among respondents with low and high rates of literacy in Russia is much less than in the OECD countries. We interpret the quantitative measurements in light of qualitative data from a research project that studied life trajectories.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"520 - 535"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527130","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45190842","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 : 2018-06-03DOI: 10.1080/10609393.2018.1527126
E. Kardanova, E. Panasenko, E. Braginets
The article describes how the iPIPS instrument was used to measure the school-entry ability of first-graders and their academic progress over the course of their first year in school in the city of Sevastopol. This study provided a source of objective information for making considered policy decisions in the education sector. We present the results of our assessment of the effectiveness of the technological equipment that was provided to schools under the Modernization of Regional Education Systems (MRSO) project. A total of 655 students at schools that received this equipment participated in the study. We were able to determine that the equipment that was delivered did nothing to boost academic achievement. We conducted a qualitative study to interpret the obtained results. Based on this analysis, we were able to identify potential reasons why interactive learning tools are inadequately effective.
{"title":"The Relationship Between the Use of New Technologies and Tools and the Academic Achievement of Elementary School Students","authors":"E. Kardanova, E. Panasenko, E. Braginets","doi":"10.1080/10609393.2018.1527126","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527126","url":null,"abstract":"The article describes how the iPIPS instrument was used to measure the school-entry ability of first-graders and their academic progress over the course of their first year in school in the city of Sevastopol. This study provided a source of objective information for making considered policy decisions in the education sector. We present the results of our assessment of the effectiveness of the technological equipment that was provided to schools under the Modernization of Regional Education Systems (MRSO) project. A total of 655 students at schools that received this equipment participated in the study. We were able to determine that the equipment that was delivered did nothing to boost academic achievement. We conducted a qualitative study to interpret the obtained results. Based on this analysis, we were able to identify potential reasons why interactive learning tools are inadequately effective.","PeriodicalId":53668,"journal":{"name":"Russian Education and Society","volume":"60 1","pages":"477 - 495"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10609393.2018.1527126","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45715961","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：