University Admission In Russia: Do the Wealthier Benefit from Standardized Exams?
This paper examines the impact of family income on the results of the newly introduced Unified State Examination (USE) in Russia. We argue that entrants from wealthy households have an advantage in terms of access to higher education, since income positively affects USE scores through a higher level of investment in pre-entry coaching. We have found positive and significant relationships between the level of income and USE results for high school graduates, given equal achievement before coaching. We demonstrate that in general, investment in pre-entry coaching has positive returns, but the most significant type of investment is pre-entry courses. However, such strategy improves USE results only for students from the most affluent households.
This paper analyses the determinants of national student mobility under the unified system of admission in Russia and evaluates the barriers which still limit educational mobility. It is argued that even with the Unified State Examination (USE) and the decreased transaction costs of applying to universities, student interregional national mobility is directed towards more developed regional educational markets and richer regions, but is still limited due to the financial constraints in the absence of the additional student support. Russia is an interesting case, because it consists of regions with highly variable socio-economic development and it represents local higher education markets with different levels of competition between universities, which may influence the decision to move. USE was intended to mitigate against these differences, and for political reasons under USE such differences are not considered the main barriers of access to higher education. However, this study takes into account the importance of the institutional characteristics of regions in student mobility.
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.