Higher Education in Soviet Successor States from the Perspective of Young Academics: Are we Post Post-Soviet?

• In Event: Student experiences in higher education

Proposal

With the introduction of private institutions, tuition fees, two and three-cycle models, program-level based institutional classifications, unified national admissions exams, international providers, excellence initiatives and comparison tables, along with the removal of subordination to ministries have been combined to various degrees to bring differing levels of success in higher education in all 15 Soviet successor states since 1991. Understanding these reforms still garners further attention and we are currently 30+ years into the Post-Soviet era of higher education. This breadth of time begs three questions about Post-Soviet era higher education:

1. What are the indicators/policies/events which demonstrate a departure from the Soviet higher education system in the country discussed?

2. What are the indicators/policies/events which demonstrate the persistence of the Soviet higher education system in the country discussed?

3. Is the term ‘Post-Soviet’ still a useful framework from which to analyze the higher education sectors in the Soviet Successor state discussed?

These questions loom large over further scholarship about higher education in all Soviet successor states. The term ‘Post Soviet’ has been utilized by the field of comparative education for decades but, perhaps, it is time to discuss the contemporary validity of the term and, if possible, identify indicators that mark if the next era has begun. This paper will feature scholarship from young native scholars from the 15 former Soviet Republics and have them attempt to answer the questions posed above while reflecting on their own identities as early academics. The term ‘Post-Soviet’ has framed the early lives of these 30 to 40 year-old scholars which have recently started their scientific careers, who not only assimilate new methods but accommodate to current educational trends in their teaching and research practices while working under the still lingering effects of a fallen empire.

What is Post-Post Soviet?
To begin this paper an almost impossible task must be attempted, create a framework to begin to define the term “Post-Post Soviet”. Other academic fields have also contemplated the meaning of the term. In 2013 Russian artists and art historians attempted to look for a definition in the book Post-Post-Soviet? Art, Politics & Society in Russia at the Turn of the Decade, but capitulated that the book was, “an attempt to describe a historical moment that is not yet fully understood.” (E. Degot, M. Dziewańska, I. Budraitskis, 2013, p. 7). From the field of Human Geography comes a notion shared by the co-authors and perhaps all the contributors to this paper is that the term, “Post-Post Soviet” is a marker of progress and the ‘ruins’ of the Soviet higher education is indeed actually a measure of progress (DeSilvey and Edensor, 2013). Moving on is success.

Comparative Education Definition of Post-Post Soviet
First to be considered, and then possibly set aside, is compliance with the Bologna Process. Compliance is surely a step towards but not a guarantee of realizing a ‘Post-Post Soviet’ status as Soviet successors states began signing on to the Bologna Process starting in 1999 but the term “Post-Soviet” is still used to discuss higher education in all 15 successor states. The 2018 book entitled; 25 Years of Transformations of Higher Education Systems in Post-Soviet Countries offers case studies of the higher education systems in all 15 of the successor states but stops short of offering speculation at what is next. In chapter one, entitled “Transformation of Higher Education Institutional Landscape in Post-Soviet Countries: From Soviet Model to Where?”, the purpose of the book is stated as:

It explores how the single Soviet model that developed across the vast and diverse territory of the Soviet Union over several decades changed into 15 unique national systems, systems that have responded to national and global developments while still bearing significant traces of the past. (p. 3-4)

In the preface the book offers a further grounded rationale for this research:

The studies of post-socialist countries are especially crucial as they debunk the myths. Soviet society was not monolithic. Norms and practices changed over time and varied among communities. Identification of the real differences and similarities beyond the proclaimed statements is important and requires a generous amount of ambitious studies. Nevertheless, even very general assumptions about the Soviet past can result in great contributions to the discussion, especially if the research is comparative. Juxtaposition can reveal the core rationales for changes and the foundations of the current state of affairs. (p. vii)

In the conclusion of the opening chapter the authors discuss findings while acknowledging the limitations of the work while also setting the table for the questions asked here:

This project has contributed significantly to our understanding of landscape change and system dynamics in post-Soviet higher education systems. There are no previous studies that analysed all post-Soviet higher education systems from a comparative perspective, based on a framework guiding all case study work. Nevertheless, the project has not answered all of its own questions fully and it has posed new and additional questions that deserve the attention of higher education scholars. (p. 34)
This paper attempts to ask new and additional questions while borrowing a few organizational aspects from the book such as, a standardized framework, recruiting native scholars and providing the questions to be answered about the higher education system in each country.

The success of this paper is not contingent upon all 15 native scholars agreeing with and/or creating a definition of ‘Post-Post Soviet’. That would surely be impossible. However, an examination of the term and the estimations of the scholars here within will help to further refine the definition of the term. Signposts and changes in eras are either very dramatic (e.g. Fall of the Berlin Wall) or only perceptible and definable after much time as passed (e.g. Pax Romana). When, where and how the “Post-Soviet’ era will end is not clear, but the conversation needs to begin: “Are we ‘Post-Post Soviet’?

Authors

• Brian Lanahan, COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

• Khatuna Buskivadze, Caucasus University