The Value of the “Top 100” Program

Philip G. Altbach- Research Professor and Director of

the Center for International Higher Education at Boston

College, USA, [email protected]

The “Top 100” program has several key goals—to help Russian universities improve so that some of them can compete successfully in the global rankings, and much more important, to take their place among the best universities in the world, and also to significantly reform. On the reform agenda is governance and internationalization— both absolutely necessary if Russian higher education is to improve.

Russia is a somewhat unique case. Its university and academy sector generally underperform when compared to top universities elsewhere. Yet, there is a tremendous amount of talent among both students and the academic profession. Further, Russia has a distinguished academic tradition.

The limitations of the Soviet system and the financial and other problems of the immediate post-Soviet era seriously weakened the system. Separating research from teaching through the academy system has further harmed Russian science. These and other challenges have been recognized, and the “Top 100” program is one of the efforts to improve Russian higher education. In part, it is a way to provide additional resources to the top of the higher education sector— additional resources are of course needed throughout the system—since Russia spends less per capita on higher education and research than most developed countries. Just as important, the program is attempting to squeeze new ideas and innovative projects out of universities that have largely been rather traditional in their approach to academic development.

While significant funds are being allocation through the program, the amounts provided are not “transformative”— that is, the funds can help to support change but are not enough to ensure systemic change. Thus, the institutions themselves will need to use the funds strategically. A number of countries have implemented various kinds of“excellence initiatives” as the Germans call their programwith aims similar to the “Top 100” program. Germany wasconcerned that its quite good universities were losing outto their counterparts in the United States, the United Kingdom,and even to the Netherlands because of traditionalismand complacency. An open competition supported bysignificant funds resulted in the selection of universitiesthat promised major innovation. Just like in Russia, theGerman funds were not transformative. Slowly, a numberof more research-intensive universities that may be able tocompete with global top institutions are emerging in Germany.

Probably the most successful program has been in China, where the government identified about 100 universities and infused large amounts of money—transformative funding—to strengthen these institutions and turn them into internationally competitive research universities. These programs, named the 985 and 211 initiatives, have succeeded in creating research universities, but only a few have become globally competitive. Now, a new program, the “C9” program aims to create a Chinese “Ivy League” of nine universities that can quickly become truly world class. It is not clear whether this effort will succeed.

Like in Germany, the Russian program has included several international experts on the selection and monitoring committee. The idea is that international experience can help to inform decisions and suggest international “best practices”. The international committee members recognize, of course, that any improvements must take into account Russian realities, but that international perspectives can be useful, perhaps especially for a higher education system that has for a long time been mired in tradition and unable to change. The five international members come from four countries or regions, China, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, and the United States. All but one are or have been distinguished university leaders. The international members are able to bring a global view to the project and point to innovative ideas from the rest of the world. This may be particularly valuable in the Russian context, where higher education thinking has been rather insular for a long time. In addition, an outsider perspective can also help to maintain an objective evaluation of complex issues and choices.

(From HERB, #1, 2014)

Writing

Look at the AppendixI and write a personal letter / e-mail to a friend describing your student’s life at the university.

Study Skills