Almost everyone is concerned about problems of access to education Russian society. These problems are discussed not only by scientists and officials from the education system, but also by teachers and parents. The reason is that education is increasingly considered by both the population and the governments of most countries of the world as an important economic resource that ensures successful self-realization, social mobility and material well-being of the individual in modern world. At the same time, the requirements that were and are presented to those wishing to receive an education are not always the same, which creates a problem of inequality, primarily related to the accessibility of education and its quality for people of different socio-economic status, nationality, gender, physical abilities, etc. The principle of equality of opportunity in education is to give everyone, regardless of background, the opportunity to achieve the level that best matches their potential. Lack of equal access to education effectively perpetuates economic, social and cultural inequalities, preventing children from moving from the bottom to the top. There are several concepts of unequal access to education. This is legal inequality, which is considered as inequality of rights enshrined in law and socio-economic inequality caused by the socio-economic characteristics of various population groups.

For Russia, experts note discrepancies between the declared goals and real facts, indicating the inability of the education system to meet these goals. The formation of the economy of the new Russia was accompanied by a sharp and significant reduction in government spending on education. This led to the degradation of institutions at all levels of education. The deterioration of the material and technical base and human resources had a negative impact on the accessibility and quality of education.

Russian system education does not ensure social mobility of the population, there are no conditions for an “equal start”, quality education today is virtually inaccessible without connections and/or money, there is no system of social (grant) support for students from low-income families. The introduction of market relations into the field of education causes a growing degree of inequality among educational institutions, primarily higher education. Political and social changes, the development of democracy create favorable conditions for reforms, including in the field of education, but these same changes cause an increase in corruption, crime and other negative consequences.

The development of the non-state sector in the field of education and the official provision of paid educational services (including the use of paid forms of education in state educational institutions) in the context of ensuring equality and accessibility is ambiguous. In 2006, paid educational services were provided to the population for 189.6 billion rubles, or 10.4% more than in 2005. On the one hand, the development of a system of paid educational services expands access to vocational education through the introduction of paid vocational education, which brought Russia to one of the leading places in the world in terms of the relative number of students in higher educational institutions. But on the other hand, paying for education reduces its accessibility for the poor.

In the context of constant underfunding of the education system and the increase in its fees, the income and disposable resources of parents are a significant factor influencing the accessibility of education for children from different social strata of the population. Subjective side The problem of accessibility lies in the fact that almost all social groups are confident that education has become paid.

Currently, one of the public priorities in Russian Federation is to ensure the right to education of persons with disabilities and people with disabilities within the framework of inclusive education.

Creating conditions in universities for the education of students with disabilities and disabled people is becoming increasingly important every year. In 2001, 11,073 students with disabilities and disabilities studied at 299 universities in the system of the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation. The number of students with disabilities and disabilities in Russian universities continues to grow: from 5.4 thousand people in 2002 to 14.5 thousand people in 2003, in 2016 - more than 23 thousand. IN recent years There has been a trend towards an increase in the number of educational institutions of higher professional education that provide training for people with disabilities and people with disabilities within the framework of inclusive practice. However, today availability higher education for persons of this category, it represents an acute social and pedagogical problem, which consists in creating the necessary conditions for comfortable learning of a “special” student - an inclusive educational environment.

Since the beginning of the nineties of the 20th century, as noted by I.N. Zarubin, the activity of persons with disabilities and people with disabilities in obtaining higher professional education has increased.

An analysis of pedagogical literature shows that the problem of accessibility to higher education is rooted in one of the main problems of pedagogy: personal development in specially created conditions. The term “accessibility” exists in the theory of pedagogy, expressing one of the principles of managing the activities of students (V. Davydov, L. Zankov, M. Skatkin, D. Elkonin). Recently, issues of higher education of persons with disabilities and people with disabilities have attracted an increasing number of researchers due to the obvious public recognition of the special relevance of these issues and the need to find pedagogical ways to solve them. An axiological approach to this issue, the role of social integration and rehabilitation potential high school, the social and pedagogical nature of the problem of accessibility to higher education, issues of inclusive education for people with disabilities at universities are covered in the publications of N. Malofeev, N. Nazarova, M. Nikitina, G. Nikulina, T. Privalova, E. Starobina, L. Shipitsyna and others. Problems S. Lebedeva, P. Romanov, O. Tarasova, E. Yarskaya-Smirnova and others are working on accessibility of education for people with disabilities in Russia.

The accessibility of higher education for people with special needs directly depends on the legislative support for training opportunities for this category of students in universities. Domestic and foreign experience shows that the educational process is built taking into account international legal documents (declarations, acts, covenants, conventions, recommendations and resolutions), as well as legislative and by-laws. These documents speak of the need to create in universities barrier-free environment(ramps, elevators, handrails, etc.), providing educational institutions with special furniture and rehabilitation equipment (sound amplification equipment for stationary use, typhoid devices, etc.), adapting training programs to the psychophysiological characteristics of people with disabilities (individual consultation schedule, individual schedule for taking tests and exams, etc.).

In her research, E. Martynova accessibility of higher education for persons with disabilities and people with disabilities is considering four levels: university, region, national and global level.

The first level is the university level. Accessibility “begins and ends” at a specific university. One way or another, the applicant decides how accessible a given university is to him. At this level they can meet serious problems. The first is the university admissions policy. The second problem, which follows from the first, is attracting potentially talented students to a given university. When an applicant becomes a student, this does not mean that the problem is solved. Having passed the barrier of entrance examinations, many find themselves among many difficult situations: adaptation, the financial side of life, personal problems.

The second level is regional. Accessibility at the regional level is understood by E. Martynova as an opportunity for young people to receive the desired type of education in the area where they live. This presupposes the opportunity to realize one’s abilities in the chosen profession. The university must cooperate with student scientific societies, work with gifted children in such a way as to bring them closer to scientific research. These same actions purposefully contribute to expanding the accessibility of higher education for persons with disabilities and people with disabilities.

The third level is national. Accessibility at the national level can be understood as a vertical, level-compatible national education system, so that the student has the opportunity to freely move from one level to another higher level in another educational institution. Then the question arises about standardization of curricula, certificates, diplomas, certification and transition procedures.

The fourth level is global. Global accessibility means a person's ability to enroll in any university of their choice in the world. The role of universities at the international level in expanding the accessibility of higher education is to develop student exchange, universalize final documents on higher education, and integrate into the world educational system.

Table 1

Indicators of accessibility of the services provided for people with disabilities

A student with a disability has the status of not only a student at a university, but also a disabled person. This should be reflected in curricula, teaching methods, in calculating the workload and features of the staffing table of a higher educational institution, as well as in the range of services and adaptations of the university environment that allow the applicant, and subsequently the student (person with disabilities, disabled person) to acquire learning skills, behavior in an inclusive environment, easy access to the right place at the university, and access to special equipment and a library.

Within the university inclusive education- inclusion of a student with limited health/disability in the educational environment. The educational institution must be adapted and have all the necessary conditions for the comfortable education of a “special” student. Inclusion is the process of transforming everything educational institution, aimed at eliminating barriers to the equal and open participation of all students, including those with physical disabilities, in the educational process and life of the university.

All higher education employees, parents, students, officials and the entire society are involved in this process. In this regard, a number of pressing issues can be identified, including:

Is the educational institution always ready to accept a student with disabilities?

Are there teachers who are competent in teaching students with special educational needs?

Is there the necessary (special) equipment to implement educational process at the university?

Are students with normative development ready to study together with persons with disabilities?

To date, a number of Russian universities have gained successful experience in creating special conditions for students with special educational needs as part of inclusive practice. Together with students with normative development, students with musculoskeletal or visual impairments study at Saratov State University, Tomsk State University, the Russian Academy of Entrepreneurship, etc. Conditions for training students with hearing and speech impairments have been created at the Main Educational, Research and Methodological Center professional rehabilitation of hearing impaired people, Moscow State Technical University. N. Bauman, Institute of Social Rehabilitation, Novosibirsk State Technical University. Chelyabinsk is focused on teaching students with a wide range of different disabilities state university, Moscow City Pedagogical University, Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen, TISBI Academy of Management, etc.

Currently, the Union of Russian Rectors is conducting a study of the accessibility of buildings, structures and their constituent premises of Russian universities for people with limited mobility. Road maps are being developed for the period from 2016 to 2030, in the following areas:

1) creation of a barrier-free educational environment - ensuring unimpeded access for students with disabilities to college, as well as ensuring the organization of the educational process of students with disabilities and people with disabilities using special means (architectural accessibility);

2) material and technical equipment of the educational process, taking into account special educational needs;

3) the formation of a comfortable psychological environment that allows a student with disabilities to feel comfortable in the organizational and pedagogical conditions of an educational organization;

4) access of students with disabilities and people with disabilities to new information and communication technologies and systems, including the Internet;

5) correction of the behavior of students with disabilities, disabled people and students with normative development in a university environment;

6) ensuring access for students with disabilities and people with disabilities to places of recreation and sports.

The study was carried out in 2 stages:

1. Analysis of the accessibility certificates of the facility for persons with disabilities, disabled people and the educational services provided on it by the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "OGPU".
2. Survey of students of FSBEI HE "OGPU", FSBEI HE "OSU" through official group on a social network.

We analyzed the certificates of accessibility of the facility for persons with disabilities, people with disabilities and the educational services provided on it.

Table 2

The state and existing shortcomings in ensuring conditions of accessibility for disabled people of the services provided in the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "OGPU"

	Key indicators of accessibility of services provided for people with disabilities	State
	the presence at the entrance to the facility of a sign with the name of the organization, the organization’s work schedule, the building plan, made in embossed dotted Braille and on a contrasting background	in stock
	providing disabled people with the assistance necessary to receive, in a form accessible to them, information about the rules for the provision of services, including on the preparation of documents necessary to receive the service, and on their performance of other actions necessary to receive the service	absent
	conducting instructions or training for employees providing services to the public to work with people with disabilities on issues related to ensuring the accessibility of facilities and services for them	in stock
	the presence of employees of organizations that are entrusted by administrative regulations with providing assistance to disabled people in the provision of services to them	in stock
	provision of services accompanied by a disabled person around the territory of the facility by an employee of the organization	in stock
	provision of services to the hearing impaired using Russian if necessary sign language, including ensuring access to the site for a sign language interpreter, typhoon interpreter	absent
	compliance of vehicles used to provide services to the public with the requirements for their accessibility for people with disabilities	absent
	ensuring access to the facility where services are provided for a guide dog if there is a document confirming its special training, issued in the form and in the manner approved by order of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Russian Federation	in stock
	the presence in one of the premises intended for holding public events, induction loops and sound amplification equipment	absent
	adaptation of the official website of the body and organization providing services in the field of education for people with visual impairments (low vision)	in stock
	ensuring the provision of tutor services	absent

This allows us to conclude that the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "OGPU" is not ready to fully implement inclusive education for people with disabilities and people with disabilities. At the same time, today more than 30 students with dysfunctions of the musculoskeletal system, vision, hearing, and speech disorders are studying at the Orenburg State Pedagogical University. Students with special educational needs are educated on a general basis.

It should be noted that among the university’s graduates over the entire long history there are more than 20 people with disabilities. Shortcomings in ensuring conditions for accessibility of services provided to people with disabilities did not become an obstacle to their obtaining higher education.

It should be noted that inclusion in education places increased demands on all participants in the educational process. It requires intellectual and psychological mobilization and readiness from students with disabilities, and tolerance, willingness to help, and understanding from students with normal development. In addition to the problems that arise among students, there are barriers that face teachers working in groups where there are students with disabilities.

330 people voluntarily took part in the survey. In total, the respondents were asked 2 questions in the questionnaire, the answers to which made it possible to identify the attitude of students towards persons with disabilities, towards the situation of teaching persons with disabilities and people with disabilities at the OGPU within the framework of the organization of inclusive education at the university.

To the question “How do you feel about the fact that people with disabilities study at our university?” 210 respondents answered “positively”; 115 students are “neutral” and 5 people out of 330 students are “negative”.

The next question is “How do you feel when you see people with disabilities?” revealed: 169 people feel a desire to help and a sense of responsibility towards people with disabilities, 152 people feel pity and compassion, 9 people experience a feeling of fear, hostility and irritation in the presence of people with disabilities. Perhaps students who experience negative emotions towards persons with disabilities have never had the opportunity to contact them or have insufficient knowledge about this category of persons.

Based on the results, we can conclude that psychologically, the overwhelming majority of respondents are ready to learn, interact and help people with disabilities. It is impossible to completely eradicate a negative attitude, but it is possible to help. The competencies necessary for working in inclusive education are “dissolved” in various academic disciplines, which introduce students to the psychological characteristics of persons with disabilities, disabilities and the specifics of their education in the conditions of inclusive education.

The results obtained during the study allow us to formulate the following conclusions:

1. Analysis of modern works in the field of research allows us to assert that the problem of accessibility of higher education for persons with disabilities and people with disabilities within the framework of inclusion is relevant. This is confirmed by the contradictions between the need modern society in integration and equality of life opportunities for all social groups and insufficient level of readiness of the higher education system to involve people with disabilities and persons with disabilities in the sphere of social and professional relations and insufficient theoretical and practical development of ways of its formation in the conditions educational organizations higher education.

2. Based on the results of our research using the example of the Orenburg State pedagogical university, we can conclude that the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education "OGPU" is not ready to fully implement inclusive education for persons with disabilities and people with disabilities.

3. In psychological terms, the overwhelming majority of respondents are ready to learn, interact and help people with disabilities and people with disabilities. Students are ready to accept a student with disabilities, provide him with timely assistance, support him in the learning process and promote psychological comfort in the student body.

I also break spears here. The majority of the population (according to the results of a study by A.G. Levinson) continues to believe that education, including higher education, should be free. But in fact in state universities More than 46% of the total number of students already pays. Today, 57% are studying in their first year at state universities on a paid basis. If we take into account the contingent non-state universities, it turns out that in Russia currently every second student pays for higher education (in fact, 56% of Russian students are already studying on a paid basis). At the same time, the cost of training, both in the state and non-state sectors of higher education, is constantly growing.

Already in 2003, tuition fees at state universities exceeded tuition fees at non-state universities. At prestigious higher education institutions, tuition fees can exceed the average by 2-10 times, depending on the type of university and specialty, as well as the location of the institution.

Families spend significant amounts of money not only on studying at a university, but also on entering higher education. According to sociological research, families spend about 80 billion rubles on the transition from school to university. This is a lot of money, so changing the rules for admission to universities (for example, introducing a unified state exam - Unified State Exam) will inevitably affect someone's material interests. Of the above amount, the largest share comes from tutoring (approximately 60%). It is unlikely that tutoring in itself can be considered an absolute evil. Firstly, it was, for example, back in Tsarist Russia, was practiced in Soviet times, and has flourished in the present. Secondly, with mass production - and modern education is mass production - the need for individual adjustment of a product or service to the needs of the consumer is inevitable. This is precisely the normal role of a tutor.

But in recent years, for many tutors (although by no means all), this role has significantly transformed: it began to consist in the fact that the tutor was not so much supposed to teach something within the framework of school curriculum, and not so much to provide knowledge in accordance with the requirements of not universities, but a specific university, but to ensure admission to the chosen university. This meant that payment was taken not for providing knowledge and skills, but for certain information (about the features of exam tasks, for example, or how to solve a specific problem) or even for informal services (trouble, follow up, etc.). Therefore, it became necessary to hire a tutor only and exclusively from the educational institution where the child was going to enroll (this applies both to the provision of some exclusive information and to the provision of informal services). This does not mean that admission to all universities was necessarily associated with tutors or informal relationships, but it became more and more difficult to enter prestigious universities or prestigious specialties without appropriate “support.” In general, the idea began to emerge that good teaching at school is no longer enough to enter the university that would allow one to hope for a successful professional career in the future.

Sociological studies have shown that parents still tend to believe that “learning in famous university It’s free, but you can’t get into it without money.” An alternative to money is connections. In a “regular” university, there may still be enough knowledge itself, but the knowledge itself is already differentiated into just knowledge, and knowledge taking into account the requirements of a “specific university.” And this knowledge can only be provided either by courses at a university or, again, by tutors.

38.4% of applicants focus only on knowledge. At the same time, focusing only on knowledge during admission in this context means that the applicant and his family are not inclined to enter into informal relationships in order to enter a university. But this does not at all indicate that such applicants will not resort to the services of tutors, just the perception of the tutor in in this case otherwise, it is a person (teacher or university lecturer, just some specialist) who imparts knowledge, and does not “help with admission.”

The focus on knowledge and money and/or connections among 51.2% of applicants suggests that the applicant (his family) believes that knowledge alone may not be enough, and it is necessary to insure oneself either with money or connections. In this case, the tutor performs a dual role - he must both teach and provide support to his client upon admission. The forms of this support can be different - from reaching the right people to transferring money. Sometimes, however, a tutor can only teach, and intermediaries for transferring money are sought independently of him. And finally, the third category of applicants openly rely only on money or connections. In this case, a tutor can also be hired, but his payment is the actual mechanism of payment for admission: this is the person who pushes into the university - we are no longer talking about the transfer of knowledge.

The extremely high proportion of those who consider it necessary to use money and connections when entering a university (more than 2/3) indicates that persistent clichés are emerging in public opinion about which university you can enter “without money” and which “only with money or connections.” Accordingly, admission strategies are built, a choice of university is made, and ideas about the accessibility or inaccessibility of higher education among various groups of the population are formed. It is characteristic that the concept of accessibility is increasingly complemented by the words “quality education”. In this context, what is significant is not that higher education has become accessible at all, but that certain segments of it have become even more inaccessible.

career fee education

3. The role of the Unified State Exam in the accessibility of higher education

Because of this, the unified state exam should and will be perceived in society in an extremely ambiguous manner. The idea of ​​the Unified State Exam as a tool to combat corruption in entrance exams or tutoring (which is far from the same thing) does not exhaust even a small fraction of the understanding (or misunderstanding) of this instrument. When they say that the Unified State Exam increases the accessibility of higher education, then in a situation where it has already become accessible, this statement is of little value. The most important is the answer to the question of who exactly and what kind of education will become available as a result of the introduction of the Unified State Exam. It is obvious that a prestigious education will never be enough for everyone - that’s why it is prestigious (which includes a certain restriction of access). It will also not be possible to create mass good higher education in a short time (and in Russia over 15 years the number of university students has grown 2.4 times). The process of massification of higher education is proceeding in the country at an unprecedentedly rapid pace (similar processes in the republics former USSR, as well as other countries with economies in transition, have not yet acquired such proportions), and the quality of education in its traditional sense in these conditions will inevitably fall. Therefore, if earlier it was possible to talk about fixing a certain quality and expanding accessibility, now the achieved level of accessibility must be ensured with at least some acceptable quality. Moreover, given the limited budgetary funds and the effective demand of the population, this task cannot be solved simultaneously for the entire higher education system. It would be more practical and fair to legitimize the differentiation of universities, especially since at the moment the fact that they differ in the quality of education is known to everyone. It is the explicit recording of differences in quality educational program could become the basis for posing the problem of accessibility, since the question would no longer be raised about the accessibility of higher education in general, but in relation to a specific category of higher educational institutions. But to legitimize the differentiation of universities by prestige or the quality of the educational program (which, generally speaking, does not always coincide) means at the same time to legitimize differences in their budget financing. They - these differences - exist today, but they are informal (exclusive). Making them formal and clearly defined means, on the one hand, to consolidate some rules of the game, and on the other, to clearly spell out the responsibilities of those universities that find themselves at the top. In other words, formalization will affect the rights and responsibilities of the parties, but are the parties ready for this? big question. The idea of ​​GIFO - state registered financial obligations - no matter how controversial it may be in itself, this problem allowed us to fix it extremely clearly: many prestigious universities, to which all applicants would come even with the highest category of GIFO - 1st category, would not receive those budget funds that they currently receive. And, besides, it could have turned out that they would have come with lower GIFO categories, which would have jeopardized the financial well-being of these universities.

At the same time, the lack of formalization of differences in the status of universities leads to the fact that teachers of even very prestigious educational institutions receive very small salaries, and tutoring for them becomes an almost obligatory means of remaining to teach at a university. Our calculations show that on average a tutor receives about 100-150 thousand rubles per year. or approximately 8-12 thousand rubles. per month. Considering that the budget salary of even a professor is on average 5.5 thousand rubles, we find that the tutoring “add-on” provides an income for a university teacher slightly higher than the average salary in industry or the average salary in an industry such as non-ferrous metallurgy. Naturally, in this sector prices and incomes are extremely differentiated.

If you look at the Unified State Exam problem from these positions, it will appear from a slightly different perspective. Already now, during the experiment on a unified exam, activities have begun

Introduction to the problem

1. The role of educational career planning

2. The problem of paying for higher education

3. The role of the Unified State Exam in the accessibility of higher education

Resume

Literature

Introduction to the problem

The issues of educational development in our country are hot issues; they now affect the interests of almost every Russian family. One of these issues is the accessibility of higher education.

Since 2000, the number of people admitted to universities has exceeded the number of those who successfully completed 11 classes and received a matriculation certificate. In 2006, this gap reached 270 thousand people. Enrollment in universities in recent years has exceeded 1.6 million people.

But a sharp decline in the number of applicants due to demographic reasons is just around the corner. For another year or two, the number of school graduates will exceed 1 million people, and then will drop to approximately 850-870 thousand. Judging by the situation in recent years, there should be a huge surplus of places in universities, and the problem of accessibility will cease to exist. Is this true or not?

Nowadays, having a higher education has become prestigious. Will this situation change in the near future? To a large extent, the current attitude towards the problems of higher education is formed under the influence of the trends that we observe - and it is quite inertial. In 2005, it’s hard to believe that in the early 90s of the last century, young people were thinking about whether to go to university or not. Many then preferred to make a choice in favor of the “real deal”, and now they are “getting” education in order to consolidate the social status that they received by postponing their studies to a later date.

But a significant portion of those entering universities have gone there in recent years only because not having a higher education has become simply indecent. Moreover, since obtaining a higher education becomes a social norm, employers prefer to hire those who have received it.

So, everyone learns - sooner or later, but they learn, albeit in different ways. And in the conditions of an educational boom, it is difficult for us to imagine that in a year or two the situation in the higher education system may change and, accordingly, our perception of many problems associated with entering higher school will change.

1. The role of educational career planning

On June 30, 2007, the Independent Institute for Social Policy (IISP) held an international conference dedicated to the results of the large-scale project “Accessibility of higher education for socially vulnerable groups.” Speaking about the accessibility of higher education, we will largely rely on these studies, which are unique for Russia. At the same time, we will focus on the results of another most interesting project“Monitoring the Economics of Education”, which has been conducted by the State University-Higher School of Economics for the third year.

As the results of both studies show, the desire to obtain higher education and the willingness to pay for tuition is characteristic of almost all Russian families: both families with high incomes and families with very modest incomes. Parents are ready to pay high level education, and with low. However, different family resources lead to different outcomes for children. This determines not only which university the child ultimately enrolls in, but also what kind of job he can apply for after graduating. But the different financial capabilities of families begin to influence a child’s education much earlier than it comes to entering universities.

These opportunities are determined by the school the child goes to. If 20 years ago you could simply send your son or daughter to the school next door to your home, now you have to choose the “right” school. True, 20 and 30 years ago, the quality of a school was largely assessed by how its graduates entered universities: everyone or almost everyone entered a good school. No matter how much prominent figures in education now say that school should not prepare for university, that the mindset of admission deforms the educational process, cripples the child’s psyche and creates in him the wrong life attitudes, the school continues to prepare for university. But if earlier it was possible to say that a good teacher gets everyone into school, and this complemented the characteristics of the school, now a good school is a necessary, but, as a rule, far from sufficient condition for admission to the university that the child wants to enter or to which his family wants to determine. And now they hardly even remember the teacher. At the same time, in recent years, educational networks of universities have been forming, and depending on whether the school belongs to the near or distant circle of such a network, the child’s chances of getting into the chosen university increase or decrease.

However, a child’s educational career actually begins before school. Parents now have to think about it literally from his birth: in what kindergarten he will go over how to get into a prestigious school, which one to graduate from. We can say that now, from early childhood, a child’s “credit” educational history is being accumulated. It is no longer important only how he studied, but also where. Admission or non-admission to a specific university is a logical continuation of an educational career, although the matter does not end with the university.

Consequently, a lot now depends on how early a family thinks about the prospects for their child’s education. And it is access to a good kindergarten and good school largely determine access to a good university. When we talk about the problems of rural schools, we, first of all, focus on the fact that in rural schools the quality of education is lower than in urban ones. This is usually true, but it is not the whole truth. In the village, a child goes to the kindergarten that is available: his family has no choice. He goes to the only school, he again has no choice. Therefore, his parents do not think about his educational career; more precisely, they can think about it quite late, when the question of whether to go to university and, if so, which one, will arise in full force.

Children from small and even medium-sized cities have a similar problem. They have little choice from the very beginning, and the limited choice of university only reinforces and confirms this.

If we talk about the possibilities of choosing a school for children in the capitals (Moscow and St. Petersburg), then they are higher here. A role is played not only by higher incomes of the population, but also by the presence of a developed transport network, which allows a schoolchild, especially a high school student, to get to school on the other side of the city.

At the same time, it must be emphasized that the educational opportunities provided by Moscow are significantly higher than in other regions of the country. This, in particular, is evidenced by the volume of paid services provided to the city population in education in comparison with other Russian regions

So, the presence or absence of choice either pushes parents to plan an educational career or puts this problem on hold. And a separate question is the price of such a choice.

Is this situation exclusively Russian? In general, no. In developed countries, parents begin planning their children's educational careers very early. Naturally, the quality of this planning depends on the educational and material level of the family. One thing is important - a modern university begins in kindergarten.

2. The problem of paying for higher education

In a study on the IISP project E.M. Avraamova showed that children from families with low resource potential are now en masse entering universities, but this admission has ceased to fulfill the traditional role of higher education - the role of a social elevator. As a rule, after graduating from a higher educational institution, they discover that higher education does not provide them with either income or social status.

Table 1

Relationship between household resource endowment and the possibility of obtaining a promising profession

Disappointment sets in. This is especially difficult for low-income families, since, having sent their child to university, as a rule, they have already exhausted all opportunities for a social breakthrough. Wealthier families, having discovered that the education received does not meet their expectations, rely on obtaining a second (other) higher education or some other prestigious educational program (for example, an MBA program).

A.G. Levinson, in his research within the framework of the IISP project, found that in Russian society obtaining two higher educations is becoming a new social norm. 20% of people aged 13-15 years declare their desire to obtain two higher educations, including 25% of young people in the capitals and 28% in families of specialists.

Thus, educational careers are becoming increasingly complex, involving constant choice. Accordingly, the problem of accessibility to higher education is changing and being integrated into a new social and economic context.

It is also important to take into account that entering a university does not solve all problems - it is only the beginning of the journey. You still have to graduate from a prestigious university. And this has become an independent problem in recent years.

The accessibility of higher education also depends on how the state finances it. Nowadays spears are also breaking here. The majority of the population (according to the results of a study by A.G. Levinson) continues to believe that education, including higher education, should be free. But in fact, more than 46% of the total number of students in state universities already pays. Today, 57% are studying in their first year at state universities on a paid basis. If we take into account the contingent of non-state universities, it turns out that in Russia currently every second student pays for higher education (in fact, 56% of Russian students already study on a paid basis). At the same time, the cost of training, both in the state and non-state sectors of higher education, is constantly growing.

Already in 2003, tuition fees at state universities exceeded tuition fees at non-state universities. At prestigious higher education institutions, tuition fees can exceed the average by 2-10 times, depending on the type of university and specialty, as well as the location of the institution.

Families spend significant amounts of money not only on studying at a university, but also on entering higher education. According to sociological research, families spend about 80 billion rubles on the transition from school to university. This is a lot of money, so changing the rules for admission to universities (for example, introducing a unified state exam - Unified State Exam) will inevitably affect someone's material interests. Of the above amount, the largest share comes from tutoring (approximately 60%). It is unlikely that tutoring in itself can be considered an absolute evil. Firstly, it was, for example, back in Tsarist Russia, was practiced in Soviet times, and has flourished in the present. Secondly, with mass production - and modern education is mass production - the need for individual adjustment of a product or service to the needs of the consumer is inevitable. This is precisely the normal role of a tutor.

But in recent years, for many tutors (although by no means for all), this role has significantly transformed: it began to consist in the fact that the tutor was not so much supposed to teach something as part of the school curriculum, and not even so much to give knowledge in accordance with the requirements are no longer of universities, but of a specific university, how to ensure admission to the chosen university. This meant that payment was taken not for providing knowledge and skills, but for certain information (about the features of exam tasks, for example, or how to solve a specific problem) or even for informal services (trouble, follow up, etc.). Therefore, it became necessary to hire a tutor only and exclusively from the educational institution where the child was going to enroll (this applies both to the provision of some exclusive information and to the provision of informal services). This does not mean that admission to all universities was necessarily associated with tutors or informal relationships, but it became more and more difficult to enter prestigious universities or prestigious specialties without appropriate “support.” In general, the idea began to emerge that a good education at school was no longer enough to enter the university that allowed one to hope for a successful professional career in the future.

Sociological studies have shown that parents are still inclined to believe that “you can study at a well-known university for free, but it is no longer possible to enter it without money.” An alternative to money is connections. In a “regular” university, there may still be enough knowledge itself, but the knowledge itself is already differentiated into just knowledge, and knowledge taking into account the requirements of a “specific university.” And this knowledge can only be provided either by courses at a university or, again, by tutors.

38.4% of applicants focus only on knowledge. At the same time, focusing only on knowledge during admission in this context means that the applicant and his family are not inclined to enter into informal relationships in order to enter a university. But this does not at all indicate that such applicants will not resort to the services of tutors, it’s just that the perception of a tutor in this case is different - this is a person (a teacher or university lecturer, just some kind of specialist) who imparts knowledge, and does not “help with admission” .

The focus on knowledge and money and/or connections among 51.2% of applicants suggests that the applicant (his family) believes that knowledge alone may not be enough, and it is necessary to insure oneself either with money or connections. In this case, the tutor performs a dual role - he must both teach and provide support to his client upon admission. The forms of this support can be different - from contacting the right people to transferring money. Sometimes, however, a tutor can only teach, and intermediaries for transferring money are sought independently of him. And finally, the third category of applicants openly rely only on money or connections. In this case, a tutor can also be hired, but his payment is the actual mechanism of payment for admission: this is the person who pushes into the university - we are no longer talking about the transfer of knowledge.

The extremely high proportion of those who consider it necessary to use money and connections when entering a university (more than 2/3) indicates that persistent clichés are emerging in public opinion about which university you can enter “without money” and which “only with money or connections.” Accordingly, admission strategies are built, a choice of university is made, and ideas about the accessibility or inaccessibility of higher education among various groups of the population are formed. It is characteristic that the concept of accessibility is increasingly complemented by the words “quality education”. In this context, what is significant is not that higher education has become accessible at all, but that certain segments of it have become even more inaccessible.

3. The role of the Unified State Exam in the accessibility of higher education

Because of this, the unified state exam should and will be perceived in society in an extremely ambiguous manner. The idea of ​​the Unified State Exam as a tool to combat corruption in entrance exams or tutoring (which is far from the same thing) does not exhaust even a small fraction of the understanding (or misunderstanding) of this instrument. When they say that the Unified State Exam increases the accessibility of higher education, then in a situation where it has already become accessible, this statement is of little value. The most important is the answer to the question of who exactly and what kind of education will become available as a result of the introduction of the Unified State Exam. It is obvious that a prestigious education will never be enough for everyone - that’s why it is prestigious (which includes a certain restriction of access). It will also not be possible to create mass good higher education in a short time (and in Russia over 15 years the number of university students has grown 2.4 times). The process of massification of higher education is proceeding in the country at an unprecedentedly fast pace (similar processes in the republics of the former USSR, as well as other countries with transition economies, have not yet acquired such a scale), and the quality of education in its traditional sense will inevitably fall in these conditions. Therefore, if earlier it was possible to talk about fixing a certain quality and expanding accessibility, now the achieved level of accessibility must be ensured with at least some acceptable quality. Moreover, given the limited budgetary funds and the effective demand of the population, this task cannot be solved simultaneously for the entire higher education system. It would be more practical and fair to legitimize the differentiation of universities, especially since at the moment the fact that they differ in the quality of education is known to everyone. It is the explicit recording of differences in the quality of the educational program that could become the basis for posing the problem of accessibility, since the question would no longer be posed about the accessibility of higher education in general, but in relation to a specific category of higher educational institutions. But to legitimize the differentiation of universities by prestige or the quality of the educational program (which, generally speaking, does not always coincide) means at the same time to legitimize differences in their budget financing. They - these differences - exist today, but they are informal (exclusive). Making them formal and clearly defined means, on the one hand, to consolidate some rules of the game, and on the other, to clearly spell out the responsibilities of those universities that find themselves at the top. In other words, formalization will affect the rights and responsibilities of the parties, but whether the parties are ready for this is a big question. The idea of ​​GIFO - state registered financial obligations - no matter how controversial it may be in itself, this problem allowed us to fix it extremely clearly: many prestigious universities, to which all applicants would come even with the highest category of GIFO - 1st category, would not receive those budget funds that they currently receive. And, besides, it could have turned out that they would have come with lower GIFO categories, which would have jeopardized the financial well-being of these universities.

At the same time, the lack of formalization of differences in the status of universities leads to the fact that teachers of even very prestigious educational institutions receive very small salaries, and tutoring for them becomes an almost obligatory means of remaining to teach at a university. Our calculations show that on average a tutor receives about 100-150 thousand rubles per year. or approximately 8-12 thousand rubles. per month. Considering that the budget salary of even a professor is on average 5.5 thousand rubles, we find that the tutoring “add-on” provides an income for a university teacher slightly higher than the average salary in industry or the average salary in an industry such as non-ferrous metallurgy. Naturally, in this sector prices and incomes are extremely differentiated.

If you look at the Unified State Exam problem from these positions, it will appear from a slightly different perspective. Already now, during the experiment on a unified exam, an active redistribution of tutoring income towards the teaching corps has begun. In general, rates for tutoring in those regions where the Unified State Exam is held are beginning to fall. At the same time, we can expect that prices for paid education in universities will simultaneously begin to rise, otherwise the problem of university staffing, which is already quite acute, will become even more acute. It should be noted that tuition fees in state and municipal universities in the country are growing by 15-25% annually, while in non-state universities the growth rate of tuition fees has begun to noticeably lag behind state ones.

The Unified State Exam experiment revealed another pattern - the results of the unified exam depend quite strongly on the size of the school: the more students there are in a school, the higher, other things being equal, is the average score received by its graduates when passing the Unified State Exam. IN Samara region Only for schools with more than 500 students does the score obtained by graduates exceed the average score on the Unified State Exam. This situation is easy to explain - a large school has better staff and better educational facilities. It follows that with a full-scale transition to the Unified State Exam, first of all, graduates of large schools will have access to prestigious higher education. Since such schools are mainly concentrated in the city, the path to prestigious higher education institutions will be less accessible for children from rural areas. Children of small and medium-sized cities again find themselves in an unenviable position. At the same time, it is extremely difficult to predict what impact the policy of school consolidation may have on the quality of school education and on the accessibility of quality higher education. At the same time, without such a policy, in the emerging demographic situation, the number of schools will be reduced, and educational results may turn out to be very low. True, a decrease in the average Unified State Examination score will again change the situation with access to higher education that will be considered high-quality.

Resume

In general, we can conclude that the problem of accessibility to higher education has taken on new angles in recent years. “On average,” higher education has become significantly more affordable. But for a particular school graduate this “on average” is not very important. For him, the accessibility of the university where he wants to enroll is important. And it may well turn out that this university has not become more accessible to him. Therefore, the time has come not just to look for tools to increase the accessibility of higher education as such, but, finally, to move on to specifics and evaluate how many graduates, although they entered higher education institutions, did not achieve their goals. In other words, we are beginning to talk not so much about the volume of higher education, but about its structure, and while the volume corresponds, the structure, which is very noticeable, does not correspond to the needs and expectations of the population. It also does not meet the needs of the labor market or the employer. However, this is a topic for another conversation.

Literature

1. Antonov A.S. Availability of education as social problem(differentiation of access to higher education and the population’s attitude towards it) / Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 2009.

Drogobytsky I.N. On the issue of forecasting indicators of development of the educational sphere / Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 2007.

Krasnozhenova G.F. Current state and prospects for the development of scientific and teaching staff in higher education. M., MGAPI, 2006.

4. Kravchenko A. I. Fundamentals of sociology: training manual. - M.: ed. Center "Academy", 2005.

Radugin A.A., Radugin K.A. Sociology: course of lectures. - M.: Center, 2008.

Sociology: foundations of general theory / Edited by G.V. Osipova, L.N. Moskvichev. - M.: Aspect Press, 2006.

“In the aspect of studying value orientations, special attention is paid to the value of “education.”

Speaking about education, it should be noted that today several specific promising trends in the development of a modern university have emerged:

1. The attitude of students and their parents towards university education is becoming more and more consumerist. Such components of choosing a university as a well-known brand, a beautiful and convincing catalogue, good advertising, the presence of a modern website, etc., become of great importance. In addition, and perhaps first of all, the “price-quality” principle becomes the leading one in determining a higher educational institution for future students and their parents. The university should be a megamarket for the consumption of knowledge with all the ensuing consequences.

2. For the majority of students, university education has lost the characteristic of “fatefulness”. Studying at the university is just an episode in their life, unfolding along with other, no less important episodes: parallel work, personal life, etc.

3. The university must be at the forefront of the technical and technological process, offering students latest achievements in organizing the educational process and student life.

4. Gradual university education is included in the process of virtualization, i.e. Distance education programs, teleconferences, education via the Internet - websites, etc. are gaining more and more importance. The university and teacher must be promptly accessible to any student.”

At the same time, over the past 15-20 years in the system Russian education Many problems have accumulated that threaten the preservation of the nation’s high educational potential.

One of the serious negative trends in the Russian education system has been the strengthening of social differentiation in terms of the degree of accessibility of different levels of education, as well as the level and quality of education received. Interregional differentiation continues to increase, between urban and rural areas, as well as differentiation of opportunities for children from families with disabilities to receive high-quality education. different levels income.

“There is a problem of accessibility of higher education for people with disabilities, associated with reforming the education system and social policy in relation to people with disabilities.

Despite the current federal legislation guaranteeing benefits for applicants with disabilities, a number of factors make the admission of disabled people to university problematic. Most Russian universities are not provided with even the minimum conditions necessary for the education of disabled people. Institutions of higher education do not have the opportunity to reconstruct their premises according to the principles of universal design from their own budgetary funds.

Currently, applicants with disabilities have two alternatives. The first is to enter a university at your place of residence, where there is unlikely to be an adapted barrier environment, where teachers are unlikely to be prepared to work with people with disabilities. And the second is to go to another region where such an environment exists. But then another problem arises related to the fact that a disabled person who comes from another region must “bring with him” funding for his rehabilitation program, which is difficult due to the lack of coordination among departments.”

Within the boundaries of the pan-European educational space, students and teachers will be able to freely move from university to university, and the resulting educational document will be recognized throughout Europe, which will significantly expand the labor market for everyone.

In this regard, complex organizational transformations are ahead in the field of Russian higher education: transition to a multi-level system of personnel training; introduction of credit units, the required number of which a student must obtain to obtain a qualification; practical implementation of mobility of students, teachers, researchers, etc.

Any education is a humanitarian problem. Education, of course, means awareness and professional competence, and characterizes the personal qualities of a person as a subject of the historical process and individual life.

Currently, there is a tendency towards the commercialization of higher education, towards the transformation of universities into commercial enterprises. The relationship between a teacher and a student is increasingly becoming a market one: the teacher sells his services - the student buys them or orders new ones if the ones offered do not satisfy him. The taught disciplines are reoriented to the immediate needs of the market, as a result of which there is a “decrease” in the importance of system fundamentality. There is a reduction specific gravity courses in fundamental sciences, which give way to so-called “useful knowledge,” that is, applied knowledge, primarily numerous special courses, sometimes esoteric.

Russia inherited from Soviet times free higher professional education, one of the main principles of which was the competitive selection of applicants to the university. But there existed and especially reveals itself in modern conditions, along with the official one, a completely different practice of selecting applicants for higher education. It is based, on the one hand, on the social connections of applicants’ families, on social capital, on the other hand, on the basis of monetary relations, in other words, on the purchase of the necessary results of competitive selection, regardless of the actual level of training of applicants and their intellectual development. Those who go to study are not those who are better prepared and have a better understanding, but those for whom their parents were able to pay the required amount of money.

A university is both intellectual and information center for local civil society institutions, as well as a forge leadership qualities for them. Higher education, especially universities, can play a key role in the deep evolutionary transformation of regions, the country as a whole, and in the formation and development of civil society in it. This requires the formation of interest both in university structures and in the student environment.

“The first paid places in state universities appeared in 1992. The demand for paid higher education services began to form precisely from that time, i.e. even before the opening of the first non-state universities (1995) In 2001 – 2002 65% of respondents considered paid education more prestigious, and among the group of “payers” this opinion was expressed by 75% of respondents.” In 2006-2007 total number of students denying greater prestige commercial education compared to education in state universities, increased to 87%, and the share of those who hold the same opinion among “paying students” was 90%. Among the reasons why one or another education system is chosen, the main ones are still ease of admission and the desire to reduce the risk of failure in exams to zero (more than 90% in both 2001-2002 and 2006-2007). . Other reasons - the level of training of teachers, better technical equipment of universities - do not have a significant impact on the selection process. When studying students' attitudes toward paid education, it is important to consider their ability to pay for their studies.

Also, based on the research of E. V. Tyuryukanov and L. I. Ledeneva, it can be noted that now the prestige of higher education is high both in general among the population of migrants they examined, and in each individual region. At the same time, in general, migrant families are characterized by limited adaptation resources: both material, information, communication and social. They are taken out of their usual life context and have limited access to social services and cultural values. The successful integration of migrants into Russian society, their transformation into an organic part of the Russian population will, in particular, contribute to the implementation of the educational orientations of their children