Development of University Ranking System in Russia
https://doi.org/10.26794/2408-9303-2019-6-1-69-75
Abstract
The article deals with the modern trends in both the international and Russian educational systems, as well as the trends in the rankings of universities. There were studied and introduced domestic rankings of universities, created by the media and professional communities, the most famous of which are the Expert RA rating and rating of “Interfax”. The most reliable domestic rating that has passed an independent auditing procedure has become the Moscow International University ranking “The three University missions” (MosIUR). The article justifies the necessity for the development of the Russian system of ranking of domestic and foreign universities, which will improve the political status of Russia and motivate universities to compete. As part of the improvement and development of “The three University missions” rating there has been proposed the group rating of universities. The proposed recommendations for the formation of ranking groups for universities are acceptable not only for MosIUR but also for the ranking systems of universities such as Expert RA rating and Interfax, as well as other domestic and foreign media, agencies and professional communities.
About the Authors
E. V. Nikiforova
Financial University.
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena V. Nikiforova — Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor of the Department of Accounting, Analysis and Audit.
Moscow.
K. Yu. Burtsevа
Financial University.
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Kseniya Yu. Burtsevа — Can. Sci. (Econ.), Associate Professor, Doctoral student of the Department of Accounting, Analysis and Audit.
Moscow.
References
1. Bulyga R. P. Concept of formation of the public reporting of higher education institutions. Vestnik finansovogo universiteta = Bulletin of the financial university. 2015;6:156–170. (In Russ.).
2. Burtseva K. Y. Rankings assessment of the universities. Vektor nauki Tol’yattinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = The Vector of science of the Tolyatti state university. 2017;2(29):7–13. (In Russ.).
3. Burtceva K. Y. Rankings universities in the groups in international rankings. Audit i finansovyi analiz = Audit and the financial analysis. 2015;2:415–420. (In Russ.).
4. Kincharova A. V. World University Rankings: Methodology, effects, and criticism. Tomsk: Preprint; 2013. 49 p. (In Russ.).
5. Kovaleva E. N. The rating of educational organizations as a tool to assess its efficiency (German experience). Chelovecheskii kapital i professional’noe obrazovanie = Human capital and professional education. 2014;1(9):9–19. (In Russ.).
6. Melnik M. V., Kogdenko V. G. The integrated reporting: Questions of formation and analysis. Mezhdunarodnyi bukhgalterskii uchet = International accounting. 2014;10(34):2–15. (In Russ.).
7. Porter M. Competitive advantage: How to achieve high results and ensure its sustainability. Moscow: Alpina Business Books; 2005. 654 с. (In Russ.).
8. Hazelkorn E. Learning to live with league tables and ranking: The experience of institutional leaders. Higher Education Policy. 2008;21(2):193–215.
9. Van Raan A. F.J. Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics. 2005;62(1):133–143.
10. Burris Val. The academic caste system: Prestige hierarchies in PhD exchange networks. American Sociological Review. 2004;69(2):239–264.
11. Merisotis J. P. On the ranking of higher education institutions. Higher Education in Europe. 2005;30:361– 363.
12. Van Raan, Anthony F. J. Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics. 2005;62(1):133–143.
Review
For citations:
Nikiforova E.V., Burtsevа K.Yu. Development of University Ranking System in Russia. Accounting. Analysis. Auditing. 2019;6(1):69-75. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/2408-9303-2019-6-1-69-75
Views:
639
.png)
.png)
Email this article 
