2008. vol. 3. No. 1

Tatiana Meshkova, Director of the Centre for Cooperation with OECD (OECD-HSE Partnership Centre), International Organizations Research Institute, State University - Higher School of Economics. PhD in Political Science

OECD’s latest PISA-2006 survey of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds shows that some countries have seen significant improvements in student performance since 2000. In many countries the PISA results are the subject for large discussion as well as the basis for education policy improvement and for changes in education strategies. But is not the case of Russia where there are no any improvements in student performance in comparison with previous PISA’s cycles. Taking into account the actuality of PISA’s methodology of quality assessment based on the competency approach for priorities and objectives of Russian education reforms the author put the following questions: What is the reason for this contradiction between this importance of PISA’s results for Russia and this political inertia? What kind of practical lessons could be derived for Russia? And what are the possible directions for usage of PISA’s experience? PISA’s lessons for Russia includes such measures as: systemic and successive introduction of competency approach into education process, development of lifelong learning, use of PISA database for revealing of different correlation between education results and large social and national context, analysis of factors of successful education policy of leading countries participating in PISA.

Evgeny Semenov, Director of the Russian Institute for Economics, Policy and Law in Science and Technology (RIEPLST), PhD in Philosophy, Professor

The main objective of the article is the critical revision of conceptual basis of the S&T policy in Russia for the last 15 years. Considering the Russian S&T policy as a system the author analyses such fundamental elements of this system as numerous programmes and conceptual documents, state bodies responsible for governing and planning in S&T, legislation in S&T and changes in practice of state funding of science. The author distinguish three main periods in post-soviet S&T policy: the first reform period (from the end of 1991 to June/July 1996); the stagnation period (from the mid of 1996 to Spring 2004) and the second reform period (from Spring 2004 till present). The main principles of the first reform were the construction of S&T policy on the basis of new principles such as openness, democracy, targeted support of talented researchers and researches groups, equal accessibility of resources for researchers. The second reform focuses on forming the national innovation system and considers the science as a key element of this system. But the realization of current reform is difficult due to the insuccessive and insufficiently considered policy inherited from stagnation period.

Vladimir Shumilov, PhD in Law Sciences, professor of the Russian Academy of the Foreign Trade

The paper addresses possible impact of future Russia’s accession to the WTO on the intellectual property rights protection in different areas including education. Stresses the importance of maintaining norms of the Agreement on Trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights in the world education area under the GATS in education services author forecasting it as the most obvious challenge if Russia joined the WTO. Resulting the analysis author suggests comments on the correspondence of Russia’s legislation to the TRIPS norms and principles, the need to adjust national educational policy in accordance with differentiated regimes of international legislation on the intellectual property rights, as well as the necessity to define policy priorities to implement Agreement on TRIPS on Russian educational market.

Olga Perfilieva, Deputy-Director of the Center for Cooperation with OECD (OECD-HSE Partnership Centre), International Organizations Research Institute, State University - Higher School of Economics. Post-graduate Studies (PhD) in Sociology

The paper turns to the analysis of a new EU initiative on European Institute of Technology creation aimed to boost an innovation and technological development in Europe facing the need to confront the global challenges. The paper describes the European Institute of Technology as a new form of cooperation between education, innovations and science and new model managing contemporary processes of technological development on the basis of multilateral networking collaboration. It focused on the structure and mechanisms of the European Institute of Technology designed for its effective and successful functioning. It argues the potential practical usage of the model described across and beyond the EU (including third countries) and its implementation in different national contexts. It stresses the innovative approach to provide sustainability of a single networking system through the system integrated specific internal mechanisms such as self-evaluation and self-reproduction and support mechanisms. The paper is also provided the list of terms used to describe the European Institute of Technology concept.