The Unified State Examination and the Determinants of Academic Achievement: Does Investment in Pre-Entry Coaching Matter?

Prakhov, Ilya

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2243758

Cited by 9 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…University requirements and the format of entry examinations were often highly specific, making the process of admission to highly selective universities complicated. As a result, the system created a high degree of inequality of opportunities among applicants, especially for applicants from the regions, who had less chance of becoming familiar with the requirements of a particular university (Prakhov 2016a(Prakhov , 2016b. The exams in each university required the physical presence of the applicant, creating an additional educational mobility problem (Prakhov, Bocharova 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional Accessibility of Higher Education In Russia

Bugakova

Prakhov

2020

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the unified system of admission to universities in Russia, applicants can still face unequal access to higher education. This can lead to an inefficient choice of the educational strategy and result in the increased inequality. This paper analyzes the barriers which restrict the interregional accessibility of higher education in the context of the Unified State Exam (USE). We propose an analytical model, reflecting the influence of channels such as family, school characteristics, and place of birth, on the educational strategies of youth. We assume that these factors affect the likelihood of being enrolled at university both directly and indirectly through USE scores. Given the unequal regional economic development and the differences in educational opportunities, we argue that university choice can be limited for certain cohorts of applicants, depending on their place of origin, because of differences in the magnitude of the barriers. An empirical examination of the model, based on data from the longitudinal study 'Trajectories in education and careers', shows that students from Moscow or Moscow Region are most likely to enroll at university, since they face the lowest barriers. The problem of the accessibility of higher education is more acute for residents of large cities or regional capitals: their likelihood of matriculating is limited by a large number of factors (cognitive abilities, SES, school characteristics). Residents of other settlements (small towns or villages), are least likely to be admitted to university, facing the highest barriers and gender inequality.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional Accessibility of Higher Education In Russia

Bugakova

Prakhov

2020

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The co-existence of separate final school exams and university entry exams created a number of tensions within the system. Individual universities determined their own entrance exam procedure, minimal passing scores and grading criteria, and in practice had a monopoly and complete discretion over admissions (Osipyan 2007, Prakhov 2015. Among other things, successful admission was contingent upon the completion of special preparatory courses provided by the university (and often directly taught by admission committee members) or upon taking additional classes with private tutors (who also often worked at the university) (Prakhov 2015).…”

Section: Background: the Introduction And The Role Of Use In The Russmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Individual universities determined their own entrance exam procedure, minimal passing scores and grading criteria, and in practice had a monopoly and complete discretion over admissions (Osipyan 2007, Prakhov 2015. Among other things, successful admission was contingent upon the completion of special preparatory courses provided by the university (and often directly taught by admission committee members) or upon taking additional classes with private tutors (who also often worked at the university) (Prakhov 2015). Due to widespread nepotism and corruption, the criteria for admission were often not students' academic achievements, but personal connections and higher social status, manifested in the ability of the applicant's family to invest in pre-entry coaching (Prakhov 2016).…”

Section: Background: the Introduction And The Role Of Use In The Russmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Unified State Examination (USE) was widely considered one of the 'pillars of modernization' (Gounko & Smale 2007) in post-Soviet Russian education and a fundamentally new and progressive initiative. It was developed and launched on an experimental basis in 2001 as a combination of school leaving tests and university entry examinations, which was meant to eliminate the widespread corruption in university admissions and equalize educational opportunities for students in central and rural parts of Russia (Shishkin 2003, Smolin 2005, Osipyan 2007, Prakhov 2015.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

‘Formalizing the Unformalizable’: Discursive Resistance to Unified State Examination by the Teacher Community

Минина

2019

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the logics of teachers' discursive resistance to the Unified State Examinations (USE) almost two decades after its introduction into the Russian education system. By drawing upon NVivo-aided Discourse analysis of online teacher discussions, interview and focus group data, the analysis critically examines the pedagogical underpinnings of USE vis-à-vis the traditional assessment system in the teaching community in two Russian cities: Moscow and Rostov-on-Don. Drawing on the concept of 'actually existing neoliberalisms' the analysis shows how, when interpreted through the lens of grassroots pedagogical values, the semantics of the globalized concepts of 'educational standardization' and 'standardized testing' takes on domestic culturally-specific meanings complementary and, at times, contradictory to the intended ones. In Russia specifically, the notion of 'standardization' comes into conflict with the pedagogical idea of a creative personalized and, therefore, profoundly 'non-standard' education, while academic assessment continues to be perceived as the non-quantifiable and subjective outcome of teacher-pupil interaction over time. The analysis underscores the interpretative and symbolic dimensions of educational policy and calls for more nuanced efforts to culturally tailor and translate borrowed educational meanings on the part of educational elites.

show abstract

“…In other words, even in the system of mass higher education there can be a situation when applicants with high social status are admitted to selective universities, while those with low social status -to less selective ones.According to the models of college choice (Vossensteyn, 2005), educational decisions are influenced by various factors: individual (school achievement/performance, gender), family (parental education, family income, social and cultural capital) and school characteristics (type of school, class specialisation). Moreover, pre-entry coaching (private tutoring) matters as well, and patterns of coaching can be closely related to the factors mentioned above (Prakhov, 2012).Restrictions to higher education may take place at different levels: individual, family and institutional. In this paper the main characteristics that distinguish students of selective and nonselective Russian higher education institutions are analysed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Barriers of Access to Selective Universities in Russia

Prakhov

2016

Higher Education Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the characteristics of students admitted to Russian universities with different levels of selectivity. First, we argue that students differ not only by the results of the Unified State Exam (USE), the university entrance exam, but by family and school characteristics, and by educational strategies. Next, it is shown that the probability of being admitted to the most selective HEIs is determined not only by the USE scores, but by characteristics that are not directly related to the applicants' abilities, such as class specialisation in secondary schools, and high school location. Moreover, we have found that income has an indirect impact on the admission results: a higher level of income increases the probability of being admitted to highly selective universities through the level of investment in pre-entry coaching and the regional differences in wages. On the other hand, regional differences in costs of living decrease the opportunities of studying in selective universities. Hence, schooling and financial barriers without alternative student support can limit the participation of less affluent students in selective universities.

show abstract

The Unified State Examination and the Determinants of Academic Achievement: Does Investment in Pre-Entry Coaching Matter?

Cited by 9 publications

References 26 publications

Regional Accessibility of Higher Education In Russia

Regional Accessibility of Higher Education In Russia

‘Formalizing the Unformalizable’: Discursive Resistance to Unified State Examination by the Teacher Community

The Barriers of Access to Selective Universities in Russia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About