Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

This chapter provides an analysis of structural transformations of the Lithuanian higher education landscape paying special attention to developments during Soviet times and in the period after 1990. Lithuanian higher education, which dates back to the sixteenth century, has changed from a traditional elite system to a mass system over time. Political, economic and social change, including the Soviet occupation of the country, the re-establishment of independence and Europeanization through the Bologna Process and accession to the European Union have had significant impact on the Lithuanian higher education landscape.

We have identified three periods of structural change. The first period from 1990 to 2000 is characterized by the re-establishment of universities and of academic autonomy and sporadic expansion of the system. During the second phase from 2001 to 2009, main system expansion and horizontal differentiation took place due to the establishment of the private higher education sector and a boom of the non-university higher education sector. Further, vertical differentiation within the system was reinforced through the availability of EU funding. The third phase, which started in 2010, has witnessed demographic decline, increasing competition and efforts of internationalization as well as more recently also attempts at consolidation of HEIs. The major challenges for the future of this system lie in increasing trust in public authorities, breaking from path dependencies of Soviet legacy, demographic changes, brain drain and increasing competition.

The Republic of Moldova has a long history of shifting borders, and a short history as an independent state. The real development of higher education started only after 1944, in the form of an integral part of the Soviet system of education and research. After independence, its development was shaped strongly by market forces, a demographic decline, alternative study options abroad and last but not least, the all-too-often contradictory policy preferences of changing governments and ministers for education. As a result, on the one hand, the country perpetuated many of the Soviet institutional arrangements in the higher education system, especially the centralised governance arrangements and the academy of science system. On the other hand, the political will to break with the Soviet past and to orientate the country towards Romania and the European Union has spawned a number of policy initiatives, including the ascension to the Bologna Process, greater institutional autonomy, governance democratisation and the implementation of a quality assurance framework along European models. Their implementation, however, has often been hampered by relatively weak institutions and political factionism. As a consequence, the differentiation of the HE system of the Republic of Moldova takes the shape of a dynamic, often contradictory process in which instable institutions are attempting to cope with growing pressures of global, European and local origins.

In this chapter we explore the higher education institutional landscape taking the case of the largest post-Soviet higher education system: Russia. In the Post-Soviet period, Russian higher education has tremendously expanded. The dramatic growth of the number of students and institutions has been facilitated by the introduction of tuition fees in public and a new private sector. The shifts in social and economic demand for professional fields affected the disciplinary and organisational structure of higher educational institutions.

The external forces (economic, political, social conditions) and higher education policy have been changing during the last decades. In the first part of the transitional period, the state provided limited regulation of the higher education system. In the 2000s, it has returned to its role of the main agent of change of the higher education system design. The diversity of institutional types that evolved in Russian higher education illustrate the consequences of massification and marketisation, such as new “broad access” segments and institutional programme drift. Also, the governmental role in shaping institutional diversity can be seen through attempts to increase vertical diversity (excellence initiatives), on the one hand, and to restrain it by closing down bottom-tier institutions, on the other.

Higher education in Tajikistan has undergone substantial changes over the past 25 years as a result of both its internal crises and those social and economic transition challenges seen throughout the Newly Independent States (NIS). HEIs in the country have also shown eagerness to change and grow as they move toward world education space. In this chapter, we examine the evolution of the Tajik system of higher education from the Soviet time through independence (1991–2015) in terms of growth, emerging landscape and diversification, and key policy developments and issues. We analyze these changes in the context of relevant economic, social and political factors, and rely on a comparative analysis in understanding the commonalities and differences in higher educational landscapes between Tajikistan and others in the NIS. Institutional diversity has occurred in the country along several dimensions. Among these is a geometric expansion of the number of HEIs: Those transformed from preexisting Soviet institutes as well as the establishment of many new ones. This has been fueled partly by the mass creation of new programs that reflect the needs of an emerging knowledge-based economy but also the result of parental craving for higher education for their children—regardless of market demands. Specific features of the massification of higher education in Tajikistan are further explained by internationalization according to the Bologna Process and other globalization agendas; the establishment of international HEIs under bilateral government agreements (with Russia), and significantly increasing HEI programs and enrolments in far-flung regions of the country—especially in programs related to industry and technology. Our analyses are based on a variety of official statistical sources; educational laws, institutional documents and reports published by international organizations; accounts from the English-language press; and open-ended interviews conducted by the authors in Tajikistan between 2011 and 2014.

Over the past century Turkmenistan developed a modern system of higher education that grew from a single university under Moscow’s direction to 24 institutions today. Under Presidents Niyazow and Berdimuhamedow, educational infrastructure developed dramatically. Despite this growth, the system of higher education suffers from a lack of faculty—universities meet the needs of less than ten percent of high school graduates. Additionally, curricula continue to reflect a strong and pervasive state ideology. Overall, the state—the only purveyor of higher education in Turkmenistan—is not meeting societal needs. This article explores the history of education policy in post-Soviet Turkmenistan, focusing on the reforms initiated by that country’s first two presidents.

The chapter explores the developmental trajectory of Ukraine’s higher education system since the middle ages. Starting with just a few comprehensive universities in the western parts at first and later Eastern parts of the country, the system gradually evolved into a diverse and differentiated institutional landscape. The variety and scope of HEIs reflects the internal logic of the system’s own development as well as outside factors, including changes of the ruling governments, fluctuations in the demographic trends, shifts in political alliances and cultural and language oscillations, which have been characteristic of the Ukrainian history. The authors elaborate on several policy rationales that came to underpin some of the changes since the collapse of the Soviet Union as well as policy discussions and policy silences (lack of dialog amongst various stakeholders) that have taken a lot of energy and yet have not lead to any noticeable changes in the institutional scene. The chapter also discusses the most recent changes in the legislation and practical implementations leaving space for future research to draw conclusions as to their effectiveness.

This chapter is the first study that carefully documents higher education (HE) reforms in Uzbekistan since the demise of the former Soviet Union. It analyses evolution of the sector with clear emphasis on government policy and its impact on changing the country’s higher education landscape since independence. The study highlights complex interactions between the distinct pre- and post-independence contexts, policy legislation and its implementation on the one hand, and the demands of the new market-based economic system and the requirements of building and strengthening state institutions to support the transition process on the other hand. The paper will show why the country’s peculiar ‘strictly top-down’ approach to reforms has not been successful in improving a number of key areas including access to higher education, and human as well as physical capacities of higher education institutions which ultimately determine the quality of higher education provisioning.