The Portrait of a Twenty-First Century Innovator in Education
The article analyzes the social and professional characteristics as well as the value orientations of the contemporary innovator in the field of education. The study was conducted among 304 participants in the 2014 Competition for Innovation in Education. The value orientations were revealed using Schwartz’s Portrait Values Questionnaire. The results were compared with data on value orientations of the Russian population obtained from the European Social Survey.
In 2012 the contestants were significantly different from the average Russian by the subjective importance that they attributed to certain value orientations as well as by their structural hierarchy. Innovators are more likely to exemplify the values of autonomy, benevolence, and universalism, and are willing to take risks in their professional life. They are less guided in their actions by a desire to obtain and retain power that is not based on their own achievements.
The study showed that specialists, including employees of educational institutions at various levels, employees of organizations not directly related to education, as well as school-age children and college students are prepared to implement and propose innovations in the field of education. Innovators stand out by their high level of education and active participation in extracurricular educational activities.
Schwartz’s theory of human values, as operationalized using di_erent instruments such as the Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ), was confirmed by multiple studies using Smallest Space Analysis (SSA). Because of its success, a short version of the PVQ was introduced in the European Social Survey (ESS). However, initial tests using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) pointed to low discriminant validity of the 10 basic values: The correlations between values next to each other in the two-dimensional space described by SSA were close to or greater than 1. In response, one research stream suggested combining the factors with low discriminant validity. Another stream suggested that the problem was not low discriminant validity but rather misspecifications in the model. Analyses of the short Portrait Values Questionnaire of the ESS confirmed the latter view.
This paper demonstrates that the problems of the short version of the PVQ exist in the full 40-item PVQ as well. Based on SEM analyses of the items of the full PVQ, we propose that it can provide measures of 15 more narrowly defined values with good discriminant validity. Our proposal respects the conceptual complexity of the values theory while avoiding contamination of composite scores. It can be expected that the improved measurement of 15 values will increase their predictive power. The presence of some single items suggests the extension of the value theory and scales to encompass more than 15 values. Implications for further development of the scale are drawn.
The present article is devoted to a comparison of today’s values of Russians with those of people living in the other countries of Europe. Many publications have broadly discussed the question of similarities and differences in the cultural and psychological characteristics of Russians and other Europeans, and these discussions represent part of a broader polemic concerning the paths of Russia’s development. New opportunities to make well-founded comparisons between the populations of Russia and other European countries have emerged because of our country’s participation in the European Social Survey (ESS), a largescale international project in which all of the participants have to work in accordance with strict methodological requirements.1 Russia joined this international project in the third round. Surveys in this round have been carried out in twenty-five European countries; they were launched in September 2006 and completed at the beginning of 2007. In Russia the survey took place in September 2006–January 2007, with 2,437 respondents taking part.
The chapter describes characteristics of Russian innovators acting within and without formal education system in comparison with Russian population as a whole. The study gives an indication of values (according to Schwartz’s theory) and motivational (PSED questionnaire) structure inherent to innovators as well as socio-demographic information such as education and occupation. The main values that underlie innovators’ activity and distinguish them from average Russian person are Universalism, Benevolence, Self-Direction and Stimulation. On the contrary such values as Conformity and Power are less important for innovators. Concerning motivation to innovation four types of motives that trigger innovative project launching were identified: social, status, financial and innovative. Social and innovative motivations serve as universal drivers of nowadays innovators in education. While financial and social motivations could play a distinguishing role for different groups of innovators. The main inference is that innovators from both sides of education, guided by the needs of others; even if they represent business oriented project, they always have a social mission. In conclusion the discussion on how the emergence of visible flow of grassroots innovation will change the education system.
In the world's leading countries the problem of appearing of schools with bad learning outcomes where mostly children from families with a low socio-economic status go is regarded nowadays as one of the key problems in educational policy. In order to solve it, laws are passed and national strategies are adopted. This survey is intended to describe main approaches and problem solution tools that are used as part of national strategies. Its relevancy is determined by the fact that support of schools working in the challenging social context and performing poorly appeared on the agenda of the Russian educational policy. World experience of researches and practical interventions in the area under question may be useful for the national education.
This book investigates the interrelationship between educational reforms and pedagogical and technological innovations, as well as the implications of this relationship for the quality of human capital. By analyzing recent educational reforms in Russia and the US, the authors shed new light on how these reforms may help or hinder innovations, such as the introduction of computer technologies into classrooms, new methods of teacher evaluation, constructivist teaching methods, and governance in public schools.
Taking labor economics as a useful lens for conceptualizing the diffusion of innovation, in the first part of the book the authors analyze book how certain power arrangements can block educational innovations in schools. In the second part they examine recent educational reforms in the US and Russia. The final part presents a vision of the next generation of educational reforms, which may enable innovation diffusion, rather than hamper it.
The book is devoted to the results received within implementation of the international EURECA program and generalizes experience of maintenance of system innovations in education through the international cooperation and partnership of higher education institution-business-power.
In 2006, Russia amended its competition law and added the concepts of ‘collective dominance’ and its abuse. This was seen as an attempt to address the common problem of ‘conscious parallelism’ among firms in concentrated industries. Critics feared that the enforcement of this provision would become tantamount to government regulation of prices. In this paper we examine the enforcement experience to date, looking especially closely at sanctions imposed on firms in the oil industry. Some difficulties and complications experienced in enforcement are analysed, and some alternative strategies for addressing anticompetitive behaviour in concentrated industries discussed.
This article is talking about state management and cultural policy, their nature and content in term of the new tendency - development of postindustrial society. It mentioned here, that at the moment cultural policy is the base of regional political activity and that regions can get strong competitive advantage if they are able to implement cultural policy successfully. All these trends can produce elements of new economic development.