Based on the results of performance monitoring conducted by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. The team of researchers who created the rating continued their work. The methodology was improved, and the number of leagues increased from 7 to 10. But first things first ... General Director of the Research Institute for Monitoring the Quality of Education, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Vladimir NAVODNOV answered our questions.

Vladimir Grigorievich, what conclusions did you come to when analyzing the results of monitoring the performance of universities in 2017?

The conclusions, as they say, are disappointing.

First, hard-hitting statistics are emerging. This year the monitoring was carried out for the fifth time. During this time, from 2013 to 2017, the Russian higher education system lost about a thousand universities and branches. It turns out, excluding weekends and holidays, on average every working day Rosobrnadzor closed one educational organization. There has never been such a process in history. I must say, not only in Russia, but in general nowhere.

Secondly, "information noise" (a huge amount of data), constant changes in the rules of the game and calculation methods do not allow educational organizations to quickly model and predict their performance.

- In this case, does it make sense to make any predictions?

I think yes. You have to be at least somehow mentally prepared for a not very predictable reality.

Moreover, we have created such software that allows simulating future situations with a certain degree of probability. But first - not about that. Let's take a look at the ranking process flow.

Formation of indicators;

Collection of data on the indicated indicators;

Data verification;

Three tasks out of four were solved by the relevant ministry. First, the formulation of indicators is very important. In fact, this is the task of the vector of development of the system, the system of views on the development of education in the country. The second, hardest task is to collect data. This can be done open source or through specialized collection. The problem is being solved, but experience has shown that there are a huge number of inconsistencies. Third, data verification is carried out. And, finally, all calculations are reduced to the division into “effective” and “ineffective” universities.

- Rough enough division.

Very rude. After all, what happens? There are universities that easily overcame all threshold values, there are those that have overcome with great difficulty, there are those that have almost overcome and there are those that have not overcome almost all indicators. In connection with these, the task arises - to describe a more subtle tool for dividing into groups or, in other words, leagues, and not lump everything together.

Based on the results of the 2016 performance monitoring, you have built a table of seven leagues. Has a similar rating been compiled based on the results of 2017?

Yes, we continued this work, improved the methodology, and 7 leagues were not enough, we did 10 (see diag. 1).

Let me explain. The publication of "Seven Shades of Monitoring" aroused great interest, there were many calls and inquiries. Especially in the formation of the last, 7th league, which included all the "ineffective" universities. It turned out to be very large: from those universities that “barely made it to the effective level,” to those that really look very bad. Therefore, the task arose to expand the number of leagues. I want to emphasize that the choice of the number of leagues is up to the developers. So far we have settled on 10. Let's see how this mechanism works.

- What's new this year compared to last?

First, the methodology was improved by increasing the number of leagues and introducing additional parameters that are necessary for the calculation. Secondly, calculations were made not only based on the new data for 2017, but also “back calculations” for all five years of monitoring. This allows you to analyze the development of the education system.

Let me remind you that the methodology for determining threshold values \u200b\u200bis the basis. True, when it was created twenty years ago, the lower quartile was proposed as a threshold value, which for each accreditation indicator divided universities into 75% of the best and 25% of the worst. In the monitoring, the median was taken as the threshold value, which divided the universities in half: 50% of the best and 50% of the worst. For each indicator of performance monitoring, the university falls into one of four groups: A - 25% of the best, B - if it is in the 50% of the best, but is not included in area A, C - if the value of the indicator is above the threshold, but is not included in area A , nor in area B, and, finally, D - if the value of the indicator is below the threshold. Plus, this year we added an E grade - the value of the indicator is below the lower quartile and is not included in area D.

Each educational organization received a certain set of assessments on the monitoring indicators. It is extremely difficult to do it manually, so special software was created. It received the name LiftUp, posted on the website msd-nica.ru, and anyone can use it. Moreover, not only for analyzing the current state and comparing with previous results, but also for forecasting and modeling future performance monitoring results.

- What do the results show? Do educational organizations move across leagues?

An amazing result: in 2017, only the Russian State University of Oil and Gas (National Research University) named after V.I. THEM. Gubkin received all the "A" marks and turned out to be the only university in the first league. By the way, he has been occupying these leading positions for the third year in a row. Here are the lists of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd leagues as an illustrative appendix (see pages 40-44).

In general, the changes that have occurred can be tracked on the website msd-nica.ru, where the full version of the rating based on the results of performance monitoring is presented in the form of a league table.

If we look at the distribution of universities by league, we will see that it is close to normal. That is, there are quite a few universities in the 1-2nd and 9-10th leagues, and the bulk is concentrated in the 4-6th leagues. We have made tables showing how the number of universities by league has changed over the course of five years. There is no unambiguous comparison here. The following effect is observed: the number of universities for which there is data on the ministry's website is different. In the first year, 1874 educational organizations were processed, then the number falls, and this would be quite justified, since the number of universities and their branches is decreasing, but for some reason in 2016 there was a surge - the number of processed organizations increased, and in 2017 it fell again ... Therefore, apparently, it makes sense here to talk not about a quantitative comparison, but about a percentage.

The bad news is that there are fewer leaders, but the good news is that there are fewer laggards. The number of universities and branches located in the "red zone" has sharply decreased. These are leagues 8-10. There are many reasons for this. One of them is that there are really fewer of them - weak universities and branches are closed. Secondly, some of the results were not processed. Well, I must say that the system still reacts. Monitoring has been carried out for five years. Universities are adjusting to the rules that exist today, and tightening their indicators - a completely natural process. But, unfortunately, one cannot say that it goes exactly over the years. A lot, of course, depends on the rules of the game, they change from year to year. But at the same time, the rules are the same for everyone, so everyone is in the same conditions.

The msd-nica.ru website also provides an additional opportunity to analyze information not only by leagues, but also by subjects of the federation. And you can see the dynamics of a particular university over the years, comparing it, for example, not only with regional competitors or in the federal district, but also by profile: for example, medical with medical.

- I wonder what indicators were the most difficult to achieve this year?

The first place in terms of non-fulfillment is expected to be the indicator “Employment” (see diagram 3): it is below the threshold value for every second organization. But it seems that the problem is not on the side of universities. Take, for example, the data provided on the employment of graduates of the Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. It cannot be that they are zero, but in the table this is exactly the case.

More details about the new ranking of Russian universities based on the results of performance monitoring will be discussed at our traditional webinar, which will be held on March 30, 2018. If readers have any questions, you can ask them now at [email protected]and we will try to answer them.

Interviewed by Ekaterina SINDEEVA.

We invite you to familiarize yourself with the results of the next monitoring of the effectiveness of Russian universities, which was conducted by the Ministry of Education and Science on the basis of data provided by educational organizations.

Monitoring the education system - a universal means of control, systematization and development of a constructive line of development in one of the most important sectors of development of society and the state.

In addition, the research results allow future students to judge the quality of education in a particular university, its prestige and the possibility of obtaining the best knowledge that will really become useful in professional activities.

We invite you to familiarize yourself with the results of the next monitoring of the effectiveness of Russian universities, which was conducted by the Ministry of Education and Science on the basis of data provided by educational organizations.

Why do you need monitoring?

Development and improvement, raising education to a new, higher level is the main goal of regular monitoring the effectiveness of universities.

Monitoring studies show:

• the quality of the work of the teaching staff, as well as the degree of assimilation of the program material by students;
• consistency, goals and objectives of training, methods of presentation of the material. The use of technical means of teaching and control of knowledge significantly simplifies the educational process and helps to rationally spend the time of the student and teacher allotted for study;
• structure and forms that make it possible to acquire knowledge in optimal conditions. Monitoring statistics reflect the number of specialized universities in each region, stationary and part-time forms of study, as well as material conditions created for independent educational and scientific activities;
• the effectiveness of the educational process, which is reflected in the data on the employment of graduates in the specialty.

Monitoring includes a number of other assessment points related to control and educational process management... Regulation of budgetary funds allocated to improve the quality of higher education is also based on research results.

It should be noted that, compared with last year's research results, the number of universities that improved their results in four or more indicators increased by 2.5 times. That is, the monitoring proves its effectiveness and positive impact on improving the quality of education.

Key performance indicators of universities

The 2017 study involved 769 universities and 692 branches of educational organizations of various forms of ownership (state, municipal and private).

Efficiency of universities was assessed on the basis of indicators characterizing:

• Educational activity - average USE score;
• Research activities - the amount of research and development work per employee;
• International activity - the percentage of foreign students to the total number of students;
• Financial and economic activity - income of an educational organization per employee;
• Salary of the teaching staff - the percentage of employees' salaries to the average salary in the region;
• Employment - the percentage of graduates who are employed in the year following graduation to the total number of graduates;
• Additional indicators are the proportion of student athletes, the proportion of employees with state awards, the proportion of students enrolled in advanced training and professional retraining programs, etc.

Main indicators of monitoring by districts

The last monitoring was attended by universities of all industry areas, located in eight federal districts and in almost all regional centers of the Russian Federation.

Central District

438 higher education organizations (including 156 branches) took part in the monitoring. 49 universities were able to achieve the required values \u200b\u200bfor all 7 indicators, including:

Northwestern District

152 higher education organizations (including 60 branches) took part in the monitoring. 20 universities were able to achieve the required values \u200b\u200bfor all 7 indicators, including:

Volga district

273 higher education organizations (including 155 branches) took part in the monitoring. 40 universities were able to achieve the required values \u200b\u200bfor all 7 indicators, including:

Southern District

151 higher education organizations (including 92 branches) took part in the monitoring. 16 universities were able to achieve the required values \u200b\u200bfor all 7 indicators, including:

North Caucasian district

The monitoring was attended by 95 higher education organizations (including 50 branches). Only 2 universities were able to achieve the necessary values \u200b\u200bfor all 7 indicators, namely:

• Vladikavkaz branch of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation.

Ural district

112 higher education organizations (including 59 branches) took part in the monitoring. 12 universities were able to achieve the necessary values \u200b\u200bfor all 7 indicators, including.

Main findings of monitoring

The number of strong students increased: 36% of universities enrolled the majority of excellent students, only 13% - mostly “C-students”.

Out of 21 universities in group 5-100, 18 enrolled the majority of excellent students.

Every sixth university in Russia has at least one direction, in which it attracted the strongest applicants in the country.

Leading universities of the country - the leaders in the quality of admission to budget places, also enrolled the strongest "paid students". The reputation effect worked.

The average score of students from leading technical universities has grown at a record.
The first positive shifts have been noted in agricultural universities.

Regions-leaders in the quality of reception by a large margin from the rest - Moscow, St. Petersburg, Tomsk.

The population is ready to pay for quality: an increase in the cost of education by an average of 16% did not affect either the demand for paid education, or the quality of paid students.

Applicants began to more rationally assess the prospects in the labor market: paid admission to "Healthcare" and "Informatics and Computer Engineering" increased, decreased to "Economics" and "Management".

Distribution of universities by quality of admission

The general conclusion of the study is that in 2017, positive changes in the quality of work and reputation of Russian universities are consolidated. The number of universities that enrolled more than half of the "excellent" applicants with USE scores above 70 for 1 year of study for budgetary places reached 151, having increased by 16 universities. Today it is 36.2% of Russian universities, compared with 31.7% a year ago. Such well-known technical universities as the Moscow Aviation Institute (National Research University), which enrolled 2,648 people on the budget, joined the "green" group. with an average score of 72.8, National Research University "Moscow Power Engineering Institute" (1461 people, average score 71.9), Moscow Technological University (2388 people, average score 71.5), Kazan National Research Technical University named after A.N. Tupolev (1012 people, average score 71.4). At the same time, the number of universities that received C grade students with scores below 56 for the first year decreased by 12. Now there are only 13.4% of such universities.

It is worth noting the universities that showed a record increase in the average score of enrolled students. Among the leading universities, this is St. Petersburg University ITMO, which raised the result by 3.4 points and moved from 8th to 5th place in the ranking. The most significant is the success of the Moscow Aviation Institute, which raised the average score by 6.4 and entered, as already noted, in the group of "excellent students". This is all the more remarkable as MAI has one of the largest budgetary tricks in the country.

This year, for the first time, there has been an improvement in admission results in a number of agricultural universities. Ural Agrarian University, Yakutsk State Agricultural Academy, Michurinsky State Agrarian University, Velikie Luki State Agricultural Academy showed an increase from 5.5 to 7.7 points.

Leaders-2017

The composition of the top 10 universities in terms of the quality of budgetary admission has not changed since last year, however, there have been changes in the placement of places in it.

The five leaders in terms of the quality of budget admission in 2017 (among universities with a budget of over 300 people) included MGIMO (95.6), MIPT (94.1), NRU HSE - Moscow (93.9), St. Petersburg State University ( 90.7), ITMO University (90.3), which ousted Moscow State University. Lomonosov. This year, all top 5 universities showed 90+ results, last year there were only 3 such universities.

The top 10 also includes NRU HSE (St. Petersburg), Moscow State University. Lomonosov, MEPhI, Moscow Linguistic University and RANEPA (Moscow).

Top-10 universities in the country in terms of the quality of budgetary admission (with more than 300 students enrolled in budgetary places)

Another aspect of leadership is the best results in areas of training. In general, approximately every sixth university has at least one direction, in which - among all universities offering education in this direction in the Russian Federation - it attracted the strongest applicants and thus, according to the average score of those enrolled in this direction, took 1-3rd a place. Such universities, which at least in one of their areas of training are leading at the country level, are located in 21 regions: 24 universities in Moscow, 15 in St. Petersburg, 3 universities in Kazan, 2 universities in Tomsk, Nizhny Novgorod and Novosibirsk. One university with at least one strong training area in the following regions: Belgorod Region, Voronezh Region, Irkutsk Region, Kaliningrad Region, Krasnodar Region, Murmansk Region, Orenburg Region, Penza Region, Primorsky Region, Republic of Bashkortostan, Republic of Dagestan, Sverdlovsk Region, Tambov region, Tula region, Ulyanovsk region.

Of course, there are universities that have attracted the strongest applicants in the country to several areas of training at once - or to all of their areas. According to the results of admission in 2017, such a 100% leadership is demonstrated by three universities: MGIMO, MIPT and NRU HSE-Moscow - absolutely in all areas of training in which they were recruited, according to the average score of those credited to the budget, they took 1-3 places among all universities offering training in these areas. At ITMO University there are 80% of such directions, at St. Petersburg State University - 76%, at Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov - 55% (for details, see the table in the appendix).

Paid admission

This year, the prices of paid education have increased significantly - by an average of 16%. At the same time, the number of students enrolled in paid places did not decrease, the quality also remained at the same level. This indicates that the population has a significant potential for effective demand for higher education. The fact that the average score for paid admission at 22 universities in Russia exceeds 70, and in 46 others it ranges from 65 to 70 - demonstrates that most of the applicants consciously choose paid education in a priority university and in a priority direction for themselves to enter budgetary place in another university.

The paid admission to medical universities and in the direction of "Jurisprudence" and "Informatics and Computer Engineering" has significantly increased. Reduced - in the areas of "Economics" and "Management". Paid admission to the country's leading pedagogical university, MSGU, has almost doubled. This shows that the population has become more rational in assessing the prospects of different professions in the labor market.

The composition of universities with the best paid admission, as in the previous year, completely coincides with the composition of universities with the best budgetary admission:

• Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (83.6 points, 133 people)
• Moscow State Institute of International Relations (82.1 points, 752 people)
• NRU HSE, Moscow (80.6 points, 3795 people)
• St. Petersburg State University (79.6 points, 1114 people)
• National Research University Higher School of Economics, St. Petersburg (78 points, 805 people)
• ITMO University (76 points, 420 people)

A group of universities with a very large paid admission stands out. Approximately every second university in this group has experienced a significant increase in such admission. Among the 10 largest providers of paid education that have enrolled in the parent university more than 2 thousand people, only the leader, NRU HSE-Moscow, has a high quality of admission 80+. Among the other universities in the group, there is not a single one with a quality of 70+. The second result - 68.6 points - has the Russian University of Economics. G.V. Plekhanov, Moscow. Third - St. Petersburg State Polytechnic University. Peter the Great who enrolled 1,730 people. with an average score of 68.1.

It should be noted that the lowest admission quality in this group is distinguished by two Moscow universities. These are Moscow Technological University (56.1) and Moscow State Transport University, recently created on the basis of several universities, which enrolled 1,876 students with an average score of 55.

Directions of training

The highest quality of budget admission is traditionally - in 9 social and humanitarian areas of training, where the average score of those enrolled in the first year exceeded 80. Among them the largest are "Jurisprudence" and "Economics" with budgetary admission from 5 to 6 thousand people. Another 20 directions have an average score of 70 to 80, that is, the vast majority of students are excellent students. Among them are such large ones as "Healthcare" (more than 25 thousand enrolled) and "Mathematics" (10 thousand), as well as "Physics" and "Information security". Literally on the threshold of the "group of excellent students" stopped "Informatics and Computer Engineering" (19.5 thousand) and "Pedagogical Education" (21 thousand)

The quality of admission to "Agriculture and Fisheries" (15.5 thousand budget places, average score 55), "Forestry" (3.3 thousand, 56) and "Transport means" (11.5 thousand places) is still unsatisfactory. , 58 points).

The most noticeable increase in the quality of reception is observed in the group "Light industry technologies" (+3.6 points) and "Aviation and rocket-space technology" (+3 points). There was a significant decrease only in two groups of directions: "Libraries and Archives" (-1.7 points) and "Geography" (-1.6 points).

The quality of admission by groups of areas of study (recruitment of more than 5 thousand people for budget and / or paid places)

In quantitative terms, an increase in both the budgetary and paid enrollment compared to 2016 occurred in the areas of "Healthcare" and "Informatics and Computer Engineering". A noticeable reduction in enrollment - for "Economics" (for budgetary places minus 748 people, 5467 people were enrolled in total; for paid ones - minus 2 thousand people, a total of 25,086 people were enrolled) and "Management" (for budgetary places minus 628 people, in total 4365 people were enrolled, for paid places - minus 1 thousand people, in total 10,908 people were enrolled). In terms of budgetary places, the enrollment was reduced in the “Energy and Power Engineering Industry” group (minus 1060 people, in total 9920 people were enrolled).

And in the paid enrollment, there was a noticeable increase in the areas of "Jurisprudence" (+ 3 thousand people, the total number of people hired for paid places in 2017 was 21.2 thousand people), "Healthcare" (+ 1.5 thousand people). people, 19 thousand enrolled in total), Linguistics and Foreign Languages \u200b\u200b(+ 865 people, 7150 enrolled in total), International Relations (+ 708 people, 4092 enrolled in total).

The Ministry of Education has issued guidelines for organizing distance learning in schools and colleges. The holidays were officially announced from March 23 to April 12, but in the face of a difficult epidemiological situation, schools are preparing to switch to online learning. What problems do they face in doing this? Directors and teachers tell.

People spend a lot of time on the Internet, and over the years they have managed to make a lot of "legacy" on the Web. Now, when looking for employees, reputable organizations carefully study not only the documents of the applicant, but also the contents of his accounts. And what do the heads of Russian schools and universities think about this? Do they browse the pages of their pupils, students, employees? Vadim Meleshko conducted a survey.

How many cooks does it take to feed an entire school? What pies do schoolchildren like the most? How much does one student's lunch cost? How do parents influence children's taste preferences? Tatyana Maslikova visited the holy of holies - the canteen - of school # 2 in the small town of Povorino in the Voronezh region and learned about the secrets of local cuisine.

In the professional biography of Kira Proshutinskaya there was everything - from the position of the host of children's programs to the work of the head of the television company. Before her eyes, Tina Kandelaki, Dmitry Bykov and Leonid Parfenov became stars. She was not afraid to change genres, experiment and develop in her business. Read about censorship on TV, the TEFI awards, school years and much more in our exclusive interview with a famous journalist.

In the Russian Federation, monitoring of the performance of higher education institutions is carried out within the framework of monitoring the entire education system, which is carried out on the basis of the RF government decree No. 662 dated August 5, 2013 "on monitoring the education system."

According to the above resolution, the monitoring of the education system has the following objectives:

• information support, development and implementation of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the field of education
• continuous analysis and assessment of the state of education and the prospects for its development
• increasing the effectiveness of the functioning of the educational system by improving the quality of management decisions made for it
• identification of violations of legislation in the field of education

Monitoring the education system includes the collection of information, its processing, systematization and storage, as well as a continuous systematic analysis of the state of the education system. At the same time, on the basis of the data obtained, it is possible to determine the prospects for the development of education.

Monitoring is organized:

• Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
• Federal Service for Supervision in Education and Science
• Federal state bodies that have in their jurisdiction organizations carrying out educational activities
• Executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation exercising state administration in the field of education
• Local self-government bodies that manage education.

"Indicators for monitoring the education system and the methodology for their calculation are determined by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation in accordance with the list of mandatory information on the education system subject to monitoring, approved by the Government of the Russian Federation dated August 5, 2013 No. 662".

The question of the need to check the quality of education in universities was raised in society a long time ago. So, back in 2004, Professor I.M. Ilyinsky as "one of the greatest secrets of today's Russia is the quality of work of state universities", in some cases which, in his opinion, it is unacceptably low.

However, concrete steps to resolve the problem of the quality of education began to be taken relatively recently. So, in May 2012, Vladimir Putin signed a decree "On measures to implement state policy in the field of education and science", where one of the instructions to the Government of the Russian Federation was to monitor the activities of state educational institutions by the end of 2012 in order to assess the effectiveness of their work. reorganization of ineffective state educational institutions. In July 2012, Dmitry Livanov (from May 21, 2012 to August 19, 2016 - Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation) said that “the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation plans to reduce the number of state higher educational institutions by 20% and their branches by thirty%" . A little later, Alexander Klimov (from June 14, 2012 to September 13, 2016 - Deputy Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation) noted that "if a university or a branch was included in the list of universities with signs of inefficiency, this is not a sentence." “For some, on the contrary, it can become a road to strengthening, and a transition to a new higher level of educational activity.”

As a result, from August 15 to September 15, 2012, the first monitoring of the performance of universities took place in Russia. It was attended by 541 institutions of higher education, and 994 of their branches. In October - November of the same year, a number of non-state universities were also monitored. “The results of the monitoring shocked the society and were vigorously discussed for a long time”. Thus, among state universities, 27% were found to be ineffective. However, at the same time, it was also said about the imperfection of the criteria for testing the effectiveness of higher educational institutions: for example, such an indicator as "infrastructure", when, at a rate of 11 m 2 per student, many state universities had this indicator almost half the norm, thereby the Ministry of Education it discredited itself, since it is the state that should allocate money for the construction of the missing meters. But for non-state universities, such an indicator as "infrastructure" was again very indicative, since non-compliance with the established norms may indicate the indifference of the founders of the university to the learning conditions of their students. In addition, "the lack of its own space, dependence on landlords is the main factor of instability and risk for the university, which reduces the trust in it on the part of applicants." There were also a lot of questions on such a criterion as "educational activity", where the key indicator was the average USE score, which depends to a greater extent on the quality of the school's work, and in no way depends on the work of the university. And finally, another drawback of the first monitoring is that “strong universities” did not take part in it. According to Professor I.M. Ilyinsky, the main reason for this is the poor organization of affairs by the leadership of the Association of non-state universities, which was instructed to carry out monitoring work on a national scale.

Be that as it may, some errors of the first monitoring were taken into account, and on August 15, 2013, the second stage of monitoring the effectiveness of the activities of universities was launched. It was attended by 1,054 universities, of which 480 were non-state. The main differences from the first stage of monitoring are:

• both state universities and non-state universities took part in the monitoring on a mandatory basis
• monitoring was carried out for all those indicators that in 2012 (educational activities, research activities, international activities, financial and economic activities, infrastructure), plus such a criterion as employment
• groups of universities with special specifics (military, creative, transport, medical, agricultural) were identified, which were assessed by additional indicators

If the university reached the values \u200b\u200bof at least three indicators, then it was recognized as effective. According to the monitoring results, “signs of inefficiency were found in 18.4% of state universities and 35% of non-state ones”.

In 2014, the third monitoring was carried out, in which 968 universities and 1356 branches took part. The main changes in comparison with previous years are:

• in contrast to 2013, additional indicators became the same both for assessing the effectiveness of universities and for assessing the effectiveness of their branches
• the threshold values \u200b\u200bof the criteria for the effectiveness of universities have changed
• at the same time, the monitoring was carried out according to all the same criteria as in 2013, only such a criterion was added as given contingent of students
• "In accordance with the decision of the interdepartmental commission for monitoring the effectiveness of educational institutions of higher education dated February 18, 2014, when assessing the activities of educational organizations and their branches, the terms signs of inefficiencyand ineffective university,as bearing significant reputational risks ”.

In June 2014, the interdepartmental commission compiled a list of organizations that met less than four performance indicators out of seven. It included 1006 higher education organizations, including 17 universities and 477 branches in varying degrees owned by the state, and 159 private universities, as well as 283 branches of non-state universities. As a result, the founders of educational organizations included in this list were recommended to take measures to improve the efficiency of their universities.

In 2015, the fourth monitoring took place, which covered “all institutions of higher education”. The main innovations are:

• registration of the actual employment of graduates, which was carried out on the basis of data from the pension fund on the deductions by employers of the corresponding contributions
• as a new criterion of efficiency, the indicator of the average salary of the teaching staff was introduced
• when making decisions about the effectiveness of universities, they stopped taking into account the indicator characterizing the infrastructure

Of the 900 universities that took part in the monitoring, it turned out that 57 achieved less than four indicators, and most of them (32) are non-state. Among the branches, the indicators were much worse. So among 1232 branches, 142 branches performed less than four indicators, and, quite surprisingly, most of them (134) are state-owned. As a result, the Ministry of Education made a decision “to send the list of higher educational institutions and branches that have fulfilled less than 4 performance indicators to Rosobrnadzor for their inclusion in the plan of measures for state control in education”.

In 2016, the next, fifth in a row, monitoring of the performance of universities was carried out. As for the process of organizing monitoring, as compared to previous years, serious changes have occurred only in relation to the criterion employment, where the interdepartmental commission unanimously supported the proposal of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia to detail the provision of information obtained in the framework of the study of employment of graduates, carried out on the basis of data from the pension fund and Rosobrnadzor. According to the data of the Main Information and Computing Center, 830 universities and 932 branches took part in the monitoring. “Among state universities 11 organizations were recognized as ineffective. Also, 199 branches of state universities, 81 private universities and 156 branches of non-state universities were recognized as ineffective ”.

The latest monitoring of the effectiveness of universities' activities took place in 2017. The following changes have been made to the monitoring process procedure compared to previous years:

• the threshold value of the employment indicator is brought in line with the calculated average value of the indicated indicator in 2016
• the threshold value of the indicator is set wageat the level of 150% of the average salary in the constituent entity of the Russian Federation

770 state, non-state, municipal, and regional educational institutions of higher education and 691 branches of educational institutions of higher education took part in the monitoring. Of the universities, 664 institutions met four or more indicators, and 483 among the branches.

Summing up the overall result of monitoring the performance of universities, we can say that the aspirations of the previous leadership of the Ministry of Education regarding the reduction of the number of universities in the country were generally achieved. So “from 2014 to 2017, the number of branches and universities decreased by 1,097 institutions (in 2014 there were 2,268 higher education institutions). At the same time, the reduction mostly affected branches, and the number of state-owned branches decreased by almost half (from 908 to 428), and about 80% of non-state branches closed (as of January 2018, out of 422 private branches of previously operating branches, only 81 remained in the education system) ".

If we talk about further prospects for monitoring the activities of universities, then they, first of all, can relate to its content and organization. Thus, it can be noted that over 6 years of monitoring the effectiveness of universities' performance, such an important criterion as quality of graduate training.As for the sphere of organizing the monitoring process, it is assumed here that as a result of the next stage of monitoring, all universities will fall into one of four risk categories, in accordance with the violations identified during the audit. Based on these data, further checks will be carried out for those universities where the risks are highest, which will most likely lead, firstly, to "saving nerves" for universities with a good reputation, and secondly, to a further reduction in the number of poorly efficient universities. and, accordingly, to an increase in the general level of education in the country.

Bibliography:

1. On the implementation of the monitoring process of the education system: Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of August 5, 2012 No. 662: entered into force on September 1, 2013 // Ros. gas. - 2013 .-- August 19.
2. Ilyinsky I.M.Non-state universities of Russia: experience of self-identification. M .: Publishing house mos. hum. university. - 2000 .-- 354 p.
3. The number of state universities by 2015 will be reduced by 20%. URL: https://www.rbc.ru/society/10/07/2012/5703fa5c9a7947ac81a69f3f (date accessed: 01.04.2018)
4. Shooting list. URL: http://expert.ru/2012/11/1/rasstrelnyij-spisok/ (date accessed: 02.04.2018)
5. The Ministry of Education and Science has identified signs of inefficiency in the work of 40 universities in the Central Federal District. URL: https://ria.ru/education/20121101/908529361.html (date accessed: 01.04.2018)
6. Ilyinsky I.M. On the effectiveness of monitoring universities // Education and an educated person in the 21st century. - 2013. - No. 2. - pp. 3-9.
7. The results of monitoring the effectiveness of universities have been officially published. URL: https://lenta.ru/news/2013/11/08/official/ (date accessed: 04/07/2018)
8. On monitoring the activities of educational institutions of higher education. URL: http://government.ru/orders/selection/405/17013/ (date of access 05.04.2018)
9. Universities that can teach: what you need to know about performance monitoring. URL: http://tass.ru/obschestvo/3445117 (date accessed: 04/07/2018)
10. The results of monitoring the effectiveness of universities in 2015 have been summed up. URL: https: //minobrnauki.rf/news/6923 (date accessed: 05.04.2018)
11. In Russia, half of the universities were expelled. URL: https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3540086 (date accessed: 08.04.2018)