Disjoint Straight Lines or How the American University Model Works in China but Doesn’t Work in Russia

• Published in: Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Serii͡a︡ 4, Istorii͡a Vol. 25; no. 2; pp. 198 - 212
• Main Author: Kubyshkin, Alexander
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Russian
• Published: Volgograd State University 01.06.2020
• Subjects: global system of higher education; modern universities; national university model in russia; social and cultural function of the university; the usa and china
• ISSN: 1998-9938; 2312-8704
• DOI: 10.15688/jvolsu4.2020.2.14

Introduction. It is well known that since the second half of the last century, national University systems have become powerful intellectual and ideological resources not only for leading countries, but also for countries with rapidly developing economies in various parts of the world. Methods and materials. The author uses the systematic approach to the analysis of historical aspects of the development of university systems in Russia, the USA and China. The historical-comparative method allows to represent the general and the different in the dynamics of the development and strengthening of the positions of universities in the global educational space. The article uses official documents of the educational authorities of Russia, the USA and China, as well as studies of leading experts in the field of studying university education in these countries. Analysis. The analysis of the relationship between universities in the United States, China, and Russia can serve as an interesting example of how their efforts to intensify economic and political development within the states themselves go far beyond national borders and become an important factor in the acute competition in the global educational market. The article considers the main aspects of the development of the university model and the dynamics of the social function of universities in Russia, the United States and China in the context of increasing competition in the world educational space and taking into account national specifics. Results. The author notes that in spite of the common trends in historical developments of the university system in Russia, the USA and China, currently they propose different variants of competitions on the global educational market. It concerns not only different approaches to the global methodology of higher education institutions, but the great difference in cultural, social and political realities in these countries.