INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL & SCIENCE EDUCATION 2016, VOL. 11, NO. 9, 2711-2726 OPEN ACCESS DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2016.802a Reforming of The System of Higher Education in The State of the Former Soviet Union: Characteristics and Problems Nursafa Gafurovna Khairullinaa, Oksana Vyacheslavovna Ustinovaa, Natalya Lvovna Antipinaa, Vera Konstantinovna Zykovab, and Tatyana Alekseyevna Romanovac aIndustrial University of Tyumen, Tyumen, RUSSIA; Tyumen Higher Military Engineering Command School (Military Institute) named. Marshal of Engineering Troops, Tyumen, RUSSIA; Tyumen State Medical University, Tyumen, RUSSIA ABSTRACT The processes of globalization that took place in the modern world, significantly influenced on s ystem of management of higher education, refocusing it on subject-subject relationship by achieving a balance of interests of the individual, society and state. The priority task of reforming higher educational system of Republic of Kazakhstan is integration into the world educational space by bringing the management of Kazakhstan's system of higher education in line with international norms and standards. This led to significant changes in organizational, structural plans, updating educational content and improving quality of training in accordance with current socio-economic and political conditions of the country's development and progressive experience of developed countries. The authors make a conclusion that system of higher education today is an area of interaction of state and society interests in the face of their institutions and citizens. It involves compulsory participation of subjects of educational relations in administration and ability to influence on functioning and development of higher education system and also to be responsible for creating conditions which are necessary for higher education system to accomplish its social and educational functions. There are some facts that prevent from cooperation of designated subjects in management of higher education system in Republic of Kazakhstan such as lack of social and personal constituent in management of higher education system, lack of legal and regulatory framework to attract individuals and society to the management of the higher education system, lack of cooperation of state authorities with the public regulatory institutions in determining of higher education content. KEYWORDS ARTICLE HISTORY World educational space, globalization, system of the Received 21 August 2015 higher education, reforming Revised 10 March 2016 Accepted 14 June 2016 CORRESPONDENCE Nursafa Gafurovna Khairullina [email protected] © 2016 Khairullinaet al. Open Access terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) apply. The license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, on the condition that users give exact credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if they made any changes. e-ISSN : 1306-3065 2712 N. G. KHAIRULLINA ET AL. Introduction Globalization, radical changes that take place in the world have a great impact not only on the development of material-technical and scientific- theoretical foundations of social progress, but also on socio-political and ideological processes, formation of free and progressive social consciousness (Belonozhko, Lavrischev, 2013; Khairullina, Moskatova, Nedosekina, Obidina, Stepanov, Sterledeva, Shitova, 2013; Gaisina, Mikhaylovskaya, Khairullina, Ustinova, Shakirova, 2015). Over the last decade on the territory of former Soviet Union significant changes have happened in management arrangements of education: legal framework has been formed, departmental approach to the management of educational institutions has overcome, interaction of state and public forms of education management are becoming, role of education is growing. The society formed a new approach to understanding of modern education, based on its quality and introduction of new innovative teaching technologies (Belonozhko, Rebysheva, 2012; Garabagiu, Ustinova, 2014). Education became one of the main priorities of the government in many countries, which tend to create a flexible mobile system of higher education that meets new requirements in terms of global competition (Frolov, Belonozhko, 2015). Over the past decade Kazakh higher education system has undergone significant structural changes: higher education institutions have received a large degree of autonomy in management of their activities, a lot of freedom in determining education policy, direction of specialization of universities has changed, competitive environment has been created. However, some facts create a need to search for new strategic approaches in management of higher education. There are increasing demands of society to quality of higher education, deepening of imbalances between supply of educational services and needs of the labor market, inefficient use of public resources, oriented to higher education system, arising from a lack of mechanisms to coordinate objectives and results of operations of higher education institutions with needs of the state and society, a radical update in learning technologies, changes in organizational and educational institutions of economic governance mechanisms, increased competition in the market of educational services. (Barbakov, Belonozhko, Siteva, 2015). At the moment, objective necessity of forming a model of state-public management system of higher education has extended in the country. On the one hand, this is dictated by the need to meet challenges of global change in the requirements for training, which are recorded in the documents of the Bologna agreement. On the other hand, reform program of Kazakhstan education stimulates transition of universities to a new education management policy by improving its quality system. In this process of integration of higher education of Kazakhstan into the world educational space it is necessary to find optimal balance between international educational trends and need to save and develop national system of higher education. One of the main objectives of reforming higher education system of Republic of Kazakhstan is integration into the world educational space. At the same time the most important condition for integration of the educational process is cooperation of state authorities to regulate public institutions in management of higher education system. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL & SCIENCE EDUCATION 2713 At the same time, conducted analysis gives reason to believe that the interaction between individual, society and state is in infancy in indicated process (Table 1). Table 1. Interaction of subjects in management system of higher education of Republic of Kazakhstan Functions/subjects Person Society State Planning definition of labor market needs; not active not active involved formation of classifier of not active not active involved specialties formation of government order not active not active involved development of state obligatory partly involved not active involved standards of education development of model programs partly involved not active involved Organization creating of legislative and other not active not active involved normative legal framework for functioning of education update of educational, learning partly involved not active involved and teaching support and material and technical base. Control and analysis licensing not active not active involved state attestation partly involved not active involved accreditation partly involved partly involved involved Method Sociological surveys were conducted in order to identify the interaction between individual, society and state in control of a system of higher education (Ignatova, 2013; Ignatova, Omarova, 2014). In the first phase a questionnaire survey was conducted among students of S.Toraighyrov Pavlodar State University, Pavlodar State Pedagogical Institute and Innovative University of Eurasia. 412 students took part in a survey, 42.3% learn in S.Toraighyrov Pavlodar State University, 24% in Pavlodar State Pedagogical Institute, 33.7% in Innovative University of Eurasia. 58.1% of respondents were girls and 41.9% were young men. At the same time 33.6% of respondents learn in technical specialties, 66.4% learn in field of Education and Human Sciences. 24.9% of the respondents are students of the first year, 37.4% are second year students and 37.7% are third year students. In the second stage research questionnaire was conducted among teachers of the same universities where students from the first stage are studying. 2714 N. G. KHAIRULLINA ET AL. Totally 396 teachers were interviewed. 58.5% of the respondents are women and 41.5% are men. 24.3% of teachers have a degree; 41.4% are training specialists in technical professions, 58.6% are in the field of education and humanities. In the third stage employers of Pavlodar region were interviewed, education management staff of Pavlodar region, secondary schools, pre-school institutions and enterprises of the city. 402 employers were interviewed, of which 198 people are educators, 204 are heads of various structural units of industrial enterprises, 8.4% have a work experience of 1-5 years, 34.4% have experience of 5-10 years and 57.2% have experience over 10 years. Most of surveyed people (94.1%) have higher education, 1.3% have vocational college, 4.6% have a degree. 38.2% of surveyed people work as head of organizations, 34.1% are supervisors, heads of departments and 27.7% are teachers, section supervisors. Results The findings of the research data showed that more than half of the surveyed students (59.9%), teachers (72.7%) and employers (76.1%) are informed about integration processes of the Republic of Kazakhstan higher education system into global educational environment, while 9.2% of students, 12.8% of teachers and 6.5% of employers do not know or are not informed (Figure 1). Figure 1. Awareness of respondents about processes of integration of higher education system at global educational environment, in % to the total number of respondents. Every second teacher answered following question "How do you feel about the changes taking place in higher education?" (53.8%) that reforms are being successful, however, 21.8% of teachers have counter-opinion. Three-quarters of employers (62.2%) believe that higher education reforming is incomplete and 9.0% reported that process of reforming have a negative result. At the same time, we note that every second respondent (49.4%) among the students of Pavlodar universities gave a positive assessment about ongoing changes and a quarter of surveyed (25.2%) expressed a negative attitude (Figure 2). INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL & SCIENCE EDUCATION 2715 Figure 2. Respondents' attitude to changes which are happening in higher education, in% to the total number of respondents The dominant purpose of the management system of higher education is quality of education. In this regard, the respondents were asked a question "Is the higher education management modernization able to improve the quality of education?" Critically assessing the various aspects of the existing system of higher education in the region, about half of the respondents from surveyed students (59.1%), teachers (61.1%) and employers (43.9%) believe that effective modernization of management of higher education system is capable to improve the quality of training. At the same time, we note that number of students (12.8%), teachers (18.4%) and employers (43.9%) believe that reform of management system of higher education partly improve quality of training among graduated students. However, about a quarter of students, teachers and employers (28.1%, 20.5%, 31.8%, respectively) expressed that modernization of control system of higher education does not contribute toward improving the quality of education (Figure 3). Figure 3. Respondents' opinion about increase (decrease) of the quality of preparation of students in conditions of modernization of management system of higher education, in % to the total number of respondents 2716 N. G. KHAIRULLINA ET AL. It is advisable to consider question of satisfaction of respondents by their education based on the fact that the most important factors affecting the quality of education is the quality of training, means of learning process and educational technologies, level of capacity of teaching staff, efficiency of achievements control, availability of feedback on the results of educational process, success of entering into society, coherence of the needs of individual, society and state in level and quality of education. Figure 4. Students' satisfaction by their education on different courses of education, in % to the total number of respondents. Despite the fact that measures to improve the management system of higher education are used in recent years in Republic of Kazakhstan, satisfaction with education received by the students seems quite pessimistic (Figure 4). Thus, the majority of first-year students (89.6%) answered "yes" to the question "Are you satisfied to get an education?", only third of third-year students are satisfied with their education (32.3%). For example, every fourth student among third-year students (25.5%) is not satisfied or partially satisfied (28.1%) with the education (Figure 5). Figure 5. Satisfaction of students of different courses of volume of acquired knowledge, in % to the total number of respondents. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL & SCIENCE EDUCATION 2717 From the data presented in Figure 5, it is clear that senior courses reduced rates of students' satisfaction about their knowledge and skills level. This is explained by the fact that senior students have already passed externship and they experience lack of training in theoretical and in practical areas. In informal interviews students explain this situation by the fact that many of them do not learn in the specialty they wanted to learn. They study on specialty where competition was less or they used parent recommendations. As a result, unloved profession does not motivate them for academic success and for having a rewarding experience from acquired knowledge. Teachers have different view about scope of obtained knowledge by students (Figure 6). Figure 6. Teachers opinion about amount of education received by students in accordance with modern requirements, in % to the total number of respondents. Less than half of the teachers (42.3%) believe that level of acquired by students knowledge comply with modern requirements. At the same time, every third teacher (31.6%) believes that level of education partly comply with modern requirements, and one of five (20.9%) does not agree with this. The survey results show that most of teachers are not fully satisfied with level of students' knowledge. One of the reasons that complicate learning is students' part time jobs (at different universities from 20 to 25% of full-time students have to combine study with work, in most cases related to future professional activity). More than half of students are not fully satisfied with quality of educational process. At the same time 30.4% of the students partially satisfied and 18.4% are of the opposite opinion. It should be noted that evaluation of teachers do not differs from students' evaluations: more than a third of respondents (33.8%) partially satisfied and 12.4% are not satisfied with the quality of educational process (Figure 7). 2718 N. G. KHAIRULLINA ET AL. Figure 7. Students' and teachers' satisfaction with quality of educational process, in % to the total number of respondents From the data presented in Figure 8 it is seen that senior students expressed low rates about quality of teaching. At the same time, we can say that 40.6%; 25.6%; 17.0% of students 1, 2, 3 courses are not satisfied or partly satisfied with quality of teaching. In this regard during the oral interview with students who are not satisfied with quality of education, a question "What have you done to improve quality of teaching?" was asked. 1 year students answered that they are not endow with such authority (56.8%) and students of second (4.3%) and third year (8.8%) responded that they are attempting to solve these problems through student governments, but they achieve positive results in only 1.7%. Teachers also mentioned such measures as performance at the Institute Council, use mass media, etc. Thus, the data clearly shows that students and teachers are not involved in management of higher education system. Figure 8. Satisfaction of students of different courses by teaching quality, in % to the total number of respondents One of the reasons for dissatisfaction with quality of education by students' is level of professionalism of staff. As it can be seen in Figure 9, most students INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL & SCIENCE EDUCATION 2719 mention matching of the level of professionalism of teaching staff (49.6%). Teachers evaluate professionalism of staff of the university slightly higher than students (61.2%). Figure 9. Evaluation by students and professors level of professionalism of the staff of institution, in % to the total number of respondents It should be noted that senior students estimated low level of satisfaction of requirements of their teachers (Figure 10). If among first-year students 76.9% were satisfied, among third-year 32% were partly satisfied and 15.4% do not satisfied with the level of requirements of teachers. This fact proofs that system demands of students to teachers worked out empirically, once again it confirms the fact that students do not participate in management, they are not familiar with legal framework, with the evaluation criteria activity of teachers, etc. Figure 10. Satisfaction of students of different years of education to the level of requirements of teachers, in % to the total number of respondents Reforming management system of higher education implies changes in the nature of education, focusing it on "free personal development", on creativity, autonomy of students, which involves formation of individual educational path 2720 N. G. KHAIRULLINA ET AL. by students (Garabagiu, Ustinova, 2013; Belonozhko, Shaforost, 2015). Therefore it is interesting to identify respondents' assessment about the use of innovations in learning process focused on an individual approach in educational activities of students (Figure 11). Figure 11. Evaluation of use of individual approach to educational activities of students, in % to the total number of respondents. Most of students (93.6%) and teachers (92.7%) believe that level of use of an individual approach in learning process is insufficient (Figure 11). Thus, we can say that in management system of higher education subject-object relationship are dominant, where student is subject to control. Students and teachers prefer auditorium form of classes: 68.8% and 63.7% respectively, which are carried out under direct supervision of a teacher. At the same time, similar forms of study focused on subject-object relationship do not aim on development of creativity and students' initiative and do not consider them as control subjects. Answers to questions about students' life strategies for the future showed that most students (88.4%) plan to continue to work and improve their professional skills. At the same time 2.2% of students want to change their profession or obtain second higher education; 3.6% are aimed on obtaining scientific-pedagogical education; 5.8% answered "hard to say" (Table 2). At the same time, 60.1% of respondents are generally optimistic about their future, 10.2% are anxious and uncertain, remaining 29.7% are not thinking about it. Along with this, students' opinion about employment prospects is quite positive (Table 3). Despite the dissatisfaction of senior students of education level and amount of received knowledge, which do not have reliable information about the future needs of economy and social sphere of specialists, we can assume that the students lean mainly on historical information and their educational orientation. Most of them (89.3%) are confident in long term employment. It was identified that optimistic forecasts do not correspond to employers' assessments of the real level of theoretical preparation of graduates, which is reflected in responses to the question "How do you evaluate the theoretical preparation of graduates?"