Alina Ivanova — Research Fellow, Center for Psychometrics and Measurements in Education, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: aeivanova@hse.ru

Elena Kardanova — Candidate of Sciences in Mathematical Physics, Associate Professor, Tenured Professor, Director of the Center for Psychometrics and Measurements in Education, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: ekardanova@hse.ru

Address: Bld. 10, 16 Potapovsky Lane, 101000 Moscow, Russian Federation.

The early years of school, when a child is only learning to read, are critically important for later development and learning. Cross-cultural comparative assessments of reading literacy provide a rich source of data for researchers, practitioners and politicians on the opportunities and prospects of early childhood development in different countries, circumstances and contexts. There are few publications of this sort available, and none of them has involved Russian-speaking children on entry to school so far.
Data obtained using two language versions of the International Performance Indicators in Primary Schools (iPIPS) on representative samples of first-graders from the Republic of Tatarstan and Scotland is used to compare the early reading assessment results between children starting school in countries with linguistic, cultural, and school entry age differences.
Two studies are conducted to analyze the possible methods of comparing assessment results of children from different countries in the absence of a common measurement scale. The first study uses the rank-ordering method to establish a correspondence between the levels of reading literacy among Russian- and English-speaking children by expert judgment. In the second study, the obtained model of literacy levels is used to establish the cut-off scores (benchmarks) of student assessment outcomes.

Liudmila Klimenko — Doctor of Sciences in Sociology, Associate Professor, Professor, Higher School of Business, Southern Federal University.

Address: 43 23rd Line Str., 344006 Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation. E-mail: lucl@yandex.ru

Liudmila Skachkova — Candidate of Sciences in Economics, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Human Resource Management, Southern Federal University.

Address: 88 Gorkogo Str., 344002 Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation. E-mail: lskachkova@gmail.com

Drawing upon findings of applied research, this article explores the indicators of subjective well-being among faculty of Russia’s leading universities. Methodological design of the study discriminates between subjective and objective measures of well-being, examines the affective and cognitive components of wellbeing, makes allowance for a set of subjective well-being determinants when zeroing in on a group of occupational factors, and uses time-tested scales for better measurement validity. Using empirical data, we demonstrate the priority of interesting work, freedom and fulfillment over income on sample of faculty members. Correlations are found among subjective well-being, teaching faculty’s age and qualifications. A negative impact of modern education reforms on occupational well-being of faculty is observed. Along with faculty retention and motivation strategies, universities should develop and implement worker subjective well-being initiatives.

Valery Novikov — Doctor of Sciences in Economics, Professor, Leading Researcher, Department for Human Development Studies, Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies, National Academy of Science of Ukraine. E-mail: valery.economy@ukr.net

Yelena Makarova — Correspondent Member of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Doctor of Sciences in Economics, Senior Researcher, Deputy Director for Research, Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies, National Academy of Ukraine. E-mail: makarova_h@ukr.net

Address: 60 Tarasa Shevchenko Blvd, 01032 Kiev, Ukraine.

In 2018, Ukraine joined the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). The results of PISA‑2018 showed that Ukraine performed below the OECD average in all areas of literacy: reading, mathematics, and science. This outcome did not meet the public expectations. The expert society has not yet fully realized the critical potential of the obtained PISA results or started a broad discussion to evaluate them and outline the avenues for education reforms.
The article analyzes the PISA‑2018 performance of Ukrainian students in reading, mathematics and science literacy, as well as gender inequality, social contexts of learning, student resilience and achievement.
Comparison of Ukraine’s educational practices with those of EU countries, reference countries and Russia is used to identify the common features of national education system development at the present-day stage and determine the specific aspects of institutional evolution in Ukrainian education. Public investment in education is analyzed and possible ways of improving its effectiveness are demonstrated. National education policy could be enhanced by updating the learning standards and competencies, raising teacher pay and extending professional development opportunities for teachers, increasing teacher motivation, developing the infrastructure, improving the inter-budgetary relations, and ensuring better performance assessment results.

Yuliya Kersha — Postgraduate Student, Research Assistant, Pinsky Centre of General and Extracurricular Education; Lecturer, Department of Educational Programs, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

Address: 20 Myasnitskaya Str., 10100 Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: ykersha@hse.ru

It can be inferred from international findings that school socioeconomic composition (SEC) is a major factor of educational inequality in secondary education at the school level. SEC is believed to have a positive relationship with student achievement along with individual student characteristics. However, a review of research methods used in most studies calls the existence of an influence into question.
A study was carried out to evaluate causal relations between school SEC and student achievement. Multilevel regression analysis and propensity score matching (PSM) methods were applied to the panel study Trajectories in Education and Careers data in order to measure the effects of one year of study at schools with low vs. high socioeconomic composition. Correlational and quasi-experimental effect sizes were compared.
Analysis results confirm that school SEC is a key factor of educational inequality in Russian secondary education, the inequality effects of school composition overlapping only partially with those of school location. Within a year of schooling, ninth-graders with similar individual characteristics may lose up to a quarter of standard error in PISA‑2012 scores if attending a school with low socioeconomic composition, while attending a high-SEC school would improve their educational outcomes by the end of the ninth grade. Negative effects were observed for two subject areas, which allows suggesting a systematic impact of SEC on student achievement. The final part of the article describes the theoretical and practical significance of the findings and presents the main directions of further research in this field.

Dmitry Savkin — Candidate of Sciences in Political Science, Vice-Rector for International Affairs, Irkutsk National Research Technical University (INRTU); Head of Baikal School of BRICS, INRTU. E-mail: d.savkin@mail.ru

Elena Loktionova — Candidate of Sciences in Economics, Senior Researcher, Baikal School of BRICS, Irkutsk National Research Technical University (INRTU). E-mail: loktionova_ea@mail.ru

Daria Khlebovich — Candidate of Sciences in Economics, Associate Professor, Deputy Head of Baikal School of BRICS, Irkutsk National Research Technical University (INRTU). E-mail: daria.khlebovich@gmail.com

Address: 83 Lermontova Str., 664074 Irkutsk, Russian Federation.

The ideas of global education and changes in the educational paradigm have determined new paths for the development of higher education, which are based on the creation and use of educational innovations, and have led to the emergence of greenfield projects as a new educational initiative. In this paper, we analyze the prerequisites and practices of greenfield-based modernization in Russia’s higher education. Specifically, the study’s goal is to elaborate on the role of greenfield projects in the transformation of the higher education ecosystem.
University is a key element of the education ecosystem, and its greenfield projects are drivers that foster educational initiative and technology innovation, transform the ecosystem and create conditions for its further development.
The method of case study made it possible to analyze the mechanism of initiating change in a particular university, identify the specific development aspects of the local greenfield project, Baikal School of BRICS, and demonstrate its systemic influence not only on the university but also on the region as a whole.
Greenfield projects help universities engage actively in the formation of modern higher education landscape rather than just get passively integrated, thus extending the ecosystem’s opportunities for collaborations and innovation funding.

Elena Chernobay — Doctor of Sciences in Pedagogy, Professor, Department of Educational Programs, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

Address: Bld. 10, 16 Potapovsky Lane, 101000 Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: echernobaj@hse.ru

Dilyara Tashibaeva — Master of Sciences in Leadership and Education, Senior Manager, Research Department, Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools AEO.

Address: 21/1 Hussein bin Talal Str., 010000 Nur-Sultan, Republic of Kazakhstan. E-mail: tashibayeva_d@nis.edu.kz

The results of the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS‑2018) of teachers and school leaders are used to compare the teacher professional development systems in Russia and Kazakhstan. In particular, comparative analysis concerns the induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers, the mechanisms of teacher professional learning, teachers’ needs for professional development, and barriers to the latter. TALIS‑2018 involved over 4,000 teachers from 230 schools in Russia and over 6,000 teachers from 331 schools in Kazakhstan. Two-stage probability (random) sampling allows extrapolating the survey results to the whole population of schools and school teachers in every TALIS participating country. It was established that neither Russia nor Kazakhstan engaged in monitoring or assessing the mechanisms of support for young and beginning teachers, and teacher evaluation did not require completing an induction or mentoring program. Development of mechanisms to ensure that professional learning programs satisfy teachers’ needs is a promising avenue for improving the system of teacher professional development. For this purpose, teachers in both countries are offered vouchers allowing them to choose professional development programs at their discretion. Overall, teachers’ needs for professional development are similar in Russia and Kazakhstan, as are barriers to their satisfaction. Those needs should always be considered when updating the learning standards and curricula, especially with regard to such increasingly important aspects of teaching as critical thinking and the use of digital technology. Particular attention should be paid to the development of special education teacher skills.

Lidia Yatluk — Oxford Russia Fellow, Head of Instructional Design and Development Department, Modum Lab.

Address: 35A Lermontovsky Ave, 190068 St. Petersburg, Russian Federation. E-mail: lidiaoutlook@gmail.com

A new form of the university has been emerging since the 1980s. Open, closely connected to the state and businesses, and internalizing the market logic of decision making, the university is becoming entrepreneurial. In Russia, changes occur with a certain lag, but present-day Russian universities already feature the new forms of activities characteristic of the global trend, such as patents, academic incubators, science parks, and startups. Formally, Russian universities have already become entrepreneurial, but they still remain traditionally overregulated institutions. In addition to collisions between the traditional logic of academia and the new one of the market that are typical of Western universities, Russia also features conflicts with the logic of bureaucracy.
A study based on 30 in-depth interviews with university researchers of virtual and augmented reality and five expert interviews with representatives of other market actors was conducted with a view to find out how everyday practices and strategies of academics change in the context of transition toward the entrepreneurial university. Referring to James C. Scott’s concept of “mētis”, we describe the most widespread situations of conflict between different logics: procuring and allocating lab funding, choosing problems for research and development, launching new education programs, and assigning statuses to institutional departments. Completing our theoretical framework with Robert K. Merton’s anomie theory, we demonstrate possible versions of strategy design and possible reasons for choosing a specific course of action. The strategies of innovation and rebellion manifest themselves most saliently in the laboratories analyzed, while conformity, retreatism and ritualism are expressed mildly and blend into one another. However, regardless of the choices they make, academics still have enough freedom and creativity to avoid being determined completely of partially by any undesired logic.

Marina Ermolaeva — Doctor of Sciences in Psychology, Professor, Professor Guruzhapov Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Educational Psychology, Moscow State University of Psychology and Education. Е-mail: mar-erm@mail.ru

Evgeny Isaev — Doctor of Sciences in Psychology, Professor, Professor Guruzhapov Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Educational Psychology, Moscow State University of Psychology and Education. Е-mail: eiisaev@yandex.ru

Dmitry Lubovsky — Candidate of Sciences in Psychology, Professor, Professor Guruzhapov Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Educational Psychology, Moscow State University of Psychology and Education. Е-mail: ludovsky@yandex.ru

Address: 20 Sretenka Str., 127051 Moscow, Russian Federation.

In this article, personality-related learning outcomes in education and teacher training Master programs are defined as professionally relevant personality traits, of which personal and professional identity are the core. An empirical study involved undergraduates in Educational Psychology Master programs (60 in the first round and 35 in the second one). The study used Lydia Schneider’s personal and professional identity diagnostic methods, L. Michelson’s communicative competence test adapted by Y. Gilbukh, and Mehrabian and Epstein’s empathy scale. It was established that Master’s degree students experienced significant changes to their professional identity in the course of their programs, making considerable progress in the development of communicative competence and empathy. Professionally relevant personality traits were found to show ambivalent dynamics during the first and second years of Master studies. The article outlines avenues of further research on educational psychology assessment of personality-related learning outcomes in Master programs.

Yulia Eremenko — Candidate of Sciences in Economics, Associate Professor, Department of Marketing, Trade and Customs Affairs, V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University.

Address: 21/4 Sevastopolskaya Str., 295015 Simferopol. E-mail: jul_eremenko@mail.ru

Olga Zalata — Candidate of Sciences in Medicine, Associate Professor, Department of Normal Physiology, V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University.

Address: 5/7 Lenina Blvd, 295015 Simferopol. E-mail: olga_zalata@mail.ru

As part of the Digital Learning Environment federal project, school education programs in Russia are expected to implement modern technology, including virtual and augmented reality. The integration of immersive technology in education should be based on research findings about the influence of virtual environments on learning effectiveness. Specific aspects of immersive technology include the sense of presence, interactivity and social interaction opportunities, and multisensory stimulation, which cumulatively exert quite a controversial influence on learning experience and outcomes. Since little data is available, decision making in the design of effective learning content is often based on practical or economic considerations. Therefore, it is vitally important to come up with objective methods of evaluating the learning content in order to understand its effects on learners’ cognitive processes and emotions immediately involved in the perception and digestion of learning material. Evaluation of virtual learning content in the process of its design and integration is suggested to be based on the level of presence and cognitive load, emotional perception of content, social interaction, and the likelihood of cyber sickness. Analysis of literature and the resulting structured set of methodological tools will aid further studies in the field based on physiological research methods to design effective learning content in virtual environments.

Tatyana Klyachko — Doctor of Sciences in Economics, Director of the Center for Lifelong Learning Economics, Institute of Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA). E-mail: tlk@ranepa.ru

Elena Semionova — Candidate of Sciences in Economics, Leading Researcher, Center for Lifelong Learning Economics, Institute of Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA). E-mail: semionova-ea@ranepa.ru

Galina Tokareva — Research Fellow, Center for Lifelong Learning Economics, Institute of Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA). E-mail: tokareva-gs@ranepa.ru

Address: 82 Vernadskogo Ave, 119571 Moscow, Russian Federation.

Teachers play a key role in achieving the national policy goals in secondary education, in particular in improving students’ outcomes. The ongoing changes of the recent years inevitably affect the functions and working conditions of school teachers. Surveys of teachers’ perceptions of self and of the current situation and development prospects in secondary education should become a required element in the design of national education policies.
This study was based on the results of the Monitoring of Secondary Education conducted by the Center for Lifelong Learning Economics (Institute of Applied Economic Research, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration) in Novgorod Oblast, Nizhny Novgorod Oblast and Tula Oblast in 2020. The survey was administered in early March, prior to the emergency transition to remote online education due to the SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic. For this reason, the article reflects little to no transformations in teachers’ perceptions of their jobs and labor conditions caused by the rapid transition to a different format of teaching. At the same time, the monitoring results can serve as a baseline for analyzing the post-COVID developments in secondary education.
Despite the government’s measures to refresh the teaching staff in schools, nothing has changed significantly in this regard so far. Teachers often resist massive refreshment initiatives, arguing that such changes would degrade the overall level of teaching competencies within the institution. Young teachers, in their turn, are increasingly more likely to be mismatched to their jobs, looking for additional sources of income within or outside the system, and ready to withdraw anytime. Attraction of youth to school teaching careers should thus be accompanied by managerial solutions for improving school effectiveness in the context of staff refreshment.

Margarita Varavva — Candidate of Sciences in Economics, Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Social Sciences, and Humanities, Orenburg Branch of Plekhanov Russian University of Economics.

Address: 50/51–53 Leninskaya/Pushkinskaya Str., 460000 Orenburg, Russian Federation. E-mail: margur2010@mail.ru

Reformation of female education in Russia in the mid‑19th century led, among other things, to further evolution of closed class-specific women’s institutes of the boarding school type that provided secondary, religious, and secular education of girls. Historical documents and archival sources are used in this article to describe the organization and content of learning in Emperor Nicholas I Orenburg Women’s Institute, the largest institution of secondary female education in the vast Orenburg Governorate at the end of the 19th century. Institute education had a considerable social value for girls from civil and military middle-class families in the cities and remote suburbs of Orenburg Governorate in that it allowed them not only to acquire general knowledge but also to develop teaching skills that they could use to make a living. Evidence is provided that, given the local settings, Emperor Nicholas I Orenburg Women’s Institute matched most of the criteria of the institute education model typical of pre-revolutionary Russia, which transformed in response to society’s demands concerning female education. Discontinuous interest, insufficient elaboration of the problem, and historical oblivion of valuable local history materials dictated the need to crane out a body of archival sources and reconstruct the process of creating a unique educational phenomenon, which Emperor Nicholas I Orenburg Women’s Institute came to be.

Valentina Kurganskaya — Doctor of Sciences in Philosophy, Professor, Leading Researcher, Institute for Philosophy, Political Science and Religion Studies under the Science Committee of the Ministry of Education and Science оf the Republic of Kazakhstan. E-mail: vkurganskaya@mail.ru

Mukhtarbek Shaikemelev — Doctor of Sciences in Philosophy, Head of the Department of Political Science, Institute for Philosophy, Political Science and Religion Studies under the Science Committee of the Ministry of Education and Science оf the Republic of Kazakhstan. E-mail: muhtarbek64@mail.ru

Address: 29 Kurmangazy Str., 050010 Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan.

The monograph Innovative Practices and Civic Initiatives in Teaching Generation Z by Elina Vanhemping and Maria Novak summarizes the authors’ experience of working in the education systems of Kazakhstan, Russia and Finland, identifies innovative trends in the three countries and analyzes the education reforms administered during the period of social transformations in the Russian Empire and in present-day former Soviet republics. The authors bring up the question of why the Bologna recommendations fail to be implemented in the education systems of Kazakhstan and Russia for discussion by the academic and teaching community and propose a scenario for including the two countries in the global educational environment with due account taken of the peculiarities of their historical and cultural development.
Our review mainly focuses on the philosophical aspects of university and school reformation issues discussed in the monograph as well as on the relationship between cultural and historical traditions and innovations in theories of liberal arts education.

Iliya Kiriya — Candidate of Sciences in Philosophy, PhD, Professor, School of Media, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

Address: 2/8 Khitrovsky Ln, 109028 Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: ikiria@hse.ru

Educational change and policy have been greatly simplified and popularized by Russian media, which results in the reproduction of superficial perceptions of the education system, its goals and actors, preventing Russian public from getting the sense of reforms and processes within the system. Representations of education policy in top-rated media are reduced to celebrations of national achievements and criticism of commercialization trends in higher education. This article analyzes the historical, cultural and structural factors behind the populist representations of education policy in Russian media, including the specific functions of the latter in the context of the enlightenment policy inherited from the Soviet era and the heavy dependence of commercialized media on the mass consumer of information. Those factors complicate the public debate on education policy, making it the prerogative of narrow elite groups.
The article also describes the key popular frames used by media, including online media, associated with representations of higher education policy in Russia.