Интеграция образования, 2017, том 21, № 4 (89)

Научный журнал

УЧРЕДИТЕЛЬ И ИЗДАТЕЛЬ:

федеральное государственное  
бюджетное образовательное  

учреждение высшего  

образования «Национальный  

исследовательский Мордовский  
государственный университет  

им. Н. П. Огарёва»

430005, Россия, Республика Мордовия,  

г. Саранск, ул. Большевистская, 68

РЕДАКЦИЯ:

430005, Россия, Республика Мордовия,  

г. Саранск, ул. Большевистская, 68
Телефон, факс: +7 (834-2) 48-14-24 

Издается с января 1996 года

Периодичность издания – 4 раза в год

Подписной индекс в каталоге  

агентств «Роспечать»  

и «МК-Периодика» – 46316

ISSN 1991-9468 (Print), 2308-1058 (Online)

Vol. 21, no. 4. 2017

(October — December)

Continuous issue – 89

Scholarly journal

FOUNDER AND PUBLISHER:

Federal State 

Budgetary Educational 

Institution  

of Higher Education 
“National Research  

Ogarev Mordovia 
State University”

68 Bolshevistskaya St., 430005, Saransk, 

Republic of Mordovia, Russia

EDITORIAL OFFICE:

68 Bolshevistskaya St., 430005, Saransk, 

Republic of Mordovia, Russia

Telephone, fax: +7 (834-2) 48-14-24

Published since January 1996

Publication frequency: quarterly

Subscription index in catalogue  

of agencies “Rospechat”  

and “MK-Periodiсa” – 46316

e-mail: inted@mail.ru, inted@adm.mrsu.ru

 http://edumag.mrsu.ru

© ФГБОУ ВО «МГУ им. Н. П. Огарёва», 2017

При цитировании ссылка на журнал  

«Интеграция образования Integration of Education» обязательна.

Полное или частичное воспроизведение в СМИ материалов, опубликованных  

в журнале, допускается только с разрешения редакции

ИНТЕГРАЦИЯ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ  
INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION

DOI: 10.15507/1991-9468

DOI: 10.15507/1991-9468.089.021.201704

Том 21, № 4. 2017

(октябрь — декабрь)

Сквозной номер выпуска – 89
16+

ИНТЕГРАЦИЯ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ. Т. 21, № 4. 2017

Научный журнал «Интеграция образования» публикует научные материалы по со
вершенствованию и распространению опыта интеграции региональных систем образования 
на территории Российской Федерации и за рубежом. В журнале публикуются материалы 
по проблемам формирования региональных систем образования, управления, вертикальной 
и горизонтальной интеграции, истории систем и учреждений образования, прикладным 
проблемам образования и воспитания, информатизации и технического обеспечения учебно-воспитательного процесса.

Наименование и содержание рубрик журнала соответствуют отраслям науки и группам 

специальностей научных работников в соответствии с Номенклатурой специальностей 
научных работников.

Журнал осуществляет научное рецензирование («двустороннее слепое») всех поступа
ющих в редакцию материалов с целью экспертной оценки по следующим специальностям:

19.00.00 ПСИХОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ
13.00.00 ПЕДАГОГИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ
22.00.00 СОЦИОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ

Все рецензенты являются признанными специалистами по тематике рецензируемых 

материалов. Рецензии хранятся в издательстве и редакции в течение 5 лет.

Редакция журнала направляет авторам представленных материалов копии рецензий или моти
вированный отказ.

Редакция журнала направляет копии рецензий в Министерство образования и науки 

Российской Федерации при поступлении соответствующего запроса.

Журнал придерживается стандартов редакционной этики в соответствии с международ
ной практикой редактирования, рецензирования, изданий и авторства научных публикаций 
и рекомендациями Комитета по этике научных публикаций.

Точка зрения редакции может не совпадать с мнением авторов.

Журнал входит в Перечень российских рецензируемых научных журналов, в которых 
должны быть опубликованы основные научные результаты диссертаций на соискание 

ученых степеней доктора и кандидата наук, и международный справочник научных  

изданий Ulrichsweb Global Serials Directory

Журнал индексируется и архивируется в: 

Российском индексе научного цитирования (РИНЦ) 

SCOPUS
EBSCO

ERIH PLUS

SHERPA / Romeo

ResearchBib

Журнал является членом Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Комитета по этике 
научных публикаций, Ассоциации научных редакторов и издателей (АНРИ) и Cross Ref

Материалы журнала доступны по лицензии Creative Commons “Attribution”  

(«Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная

INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION. Vol. 21, no. 4. 2017

“Integration of Education” scholarly journal is devoted to improvement and dissemination 

of experience of integration of regional educational systems across the Russian Federation and 
other countries. The journal welcomes materials exploring the following problems: formation of 
regional educational and administrative systems, vertical and horizontal integration, historical 
development of the above systems and academic institutions, applied aspects of education and 
upbringing, informatization and technical provision of academic process.

Titles and contents of sections correspond to branches of science and groups of specialties 

of scientists according to Nomenclature of specialties for scientists.

For complex expert evaluation all manuscripts undergo “double-blind” review.
The journal accepts articles in the following specialties for publication:

19.00.00 PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCES
13.00.00 PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCES
22.00.00 SOCIOLOGICAL SCIENCES

All reviewers are acknowledged experts in areas they are responsible for. Reviews are stored 

in the publishing house and publishing office during 5 years.

Editorial staff sends to the authors of the submitted materials copies of reviews or a substan
tiated refusal.

Editorial staff of the journal forwards copies of reviews in Ministry of Education and Science of the  

Russian Federation by request.

“Integration of Education” journal is registered in Russian Index of Scientific Citations and 

submits information about the published articles to Russian Index of Scientific Citations.

The opinions expressed by authors in the journal do not necessarily reflect those of the Edi
torial Staff.

The journal is listed in the catalogue of peer-reviewed academic journals and publications 

for publishing of principal scientific findings of dissertations and Ulrichsweb Global 

Serials Directory

The journal is indexed and archived by:

Russian Index of Scientific Citations

SCOPUS
EBSCO

ERIH PLUS

SHERPA / Romeo

ResearchBib

The journal is a member of Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), CrossRef and ASEP

All the materials of the “Integration of Education” journal are available under Creative 

Commons “Attribution” 4.0 license

ИНТЕГРАЦИЯ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ. Т. 21, № 4. 2017

РЕДАКЦИОННАЯ КОЛЛЕГИЯ

Вдовин Сергей Михайлович – главный редактор, ректор ФГБОУ ВО «МГУ им. Н. П. Огарёва», 

кандидат экономических наук, доцент, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7363-1389, rector@adm.mrsu.ru 
(Саранск, Россия)

Полутин Сергей Викторович – заместитель главного редактора, директор НИИ регионоло
гии ФГБОУ ВО «МГУ им. Н. П. Огарёва», доктор социологических наук, профессор, ORCID: http://
orcid.org/0000-0003-0399-4154, polutin.sergei@yandex.ru (Саранск, Россия)

Гордина Светлана Викторовна – ответственный секретарь, кандидат педагогических наук, 

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2265-418X, inted@adm.mrsu.ru, inted@mail.ru (Саранск, Россия)

Буквич Райко Миланович – профессор Географического института «Jovan Cvijic» Сербской 

академии наук и искусств, доктор экономических наук, профессор, r.bukvic@mail.ru (Сербия, Белград)

Варгас-Эрнандес Хосе Гуадалупе – доктор философии в области государственного управле
ния Исследовательского центра экономических и управленческих наук университета Гвадалахары, 
jvargas2006@gmail.com (Гвадалахара, Халиско, Мексика)

Гафуров Ильшат Рафкатович – ректор ФГАОУ ВО «Казанский (Приволжский) федеральный 

университет», доктор экономических наук, профессор, public.mail@kpfu.ru (Казань, Россия) 

Камильо Aнджело – доктор философии, ассоциированный профессор менеджмента Школы 

бизнеса Университета Вудбери, Angelo.Camillo@woodbury.edu (Бербанк, США)

Кириллова Ольга Владимировна – председатель Российского экспертного совета, предста
витель РЭС в Scopus CSAB; президент Ассоциации научных редакторов и издателей, кандидат 
технических наук, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0785-6181, ovkir@list.ru (Москва, Россия)

Кумар Сагар Лалит – вице-канцлер (президент) Гималайского университета, доктор философии, 

профессор, dr_lksagar@yahoo.co.in (Нью-Дели, Индия)

Макаркин Николай Петрович – президент ФГБОУ ВО «МГУ им. Н. П. Огарёва», доктор экономи
ческих наук, профессор, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3952-5811, makarkin@mrsu.ru (Саранск, Россия)

Маралов Владимир Георгиевич – профессор кафедры психологии ФГБОУ ВО «Череповецкий 

государственный университет», доктор психологических наук, профессор, ORCID: http://orcid.org/ 
0000-0002-9627-2304, vgmaralov@yandex.ru (Череповец, Россия)

Мерзлякова Галина Витальевна – ректор ФГБОУ ВО «Удмуртский государственный универ
ситет», доктор исторических наук, профессор, rector@udsu.ru (Ижевск, Россия) 

Мишра Камлеш – вице-канцлер Университета Ансал, доктор экономики, misra1957@gmail.com 

(Гургаон, Харьяна, Индия)

Маврудеас Ставрос – профессор департамента экономики Университета Македонии, доктор 

философии, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2230-7479, smavro@uom.edu.gr (Фессалоники, Греция)

Саранцев Геннадий Иванович – заведующий кафедрой методики преподавания математики  

ФГБОУ ВО «МГПИ им. М. Е. Евсевьева», доктор педагогических наук, профессор, ORCID: http://
orcid.org/0000-0002-1571-5100, gisarancev@mail.ru (Саранск, Россия)

Сингх Кадьян Джагбир – почетный президент Института управления стрессом и прикладных 

наук, ассистирующий профессор департамента коммерции Колледжа им. Свами Шраддхананда Университета Дели, доктор философии, dr.jskadyan@gmail.com (Нью-Дели, Индия)

Фёльдeш Чаба – заведующий кафедрой германского языкознания факультета гуманитарных наук Эр
фуртского университета, доктор филологических наук, профессор, foeldes@foeldes.eu (Эрфурт, Германия)

Хамуда Самир – профессор физического факультета университета Бенгази, dr_s_hamouda@yahoo.ie 

(Бенгази, Ливия)

Холяйль Ханафи – президент Университета АЗМ в Триполи, доктор философии, профессор, 

hholail@azmuniversity.edu.lb (Триполи, Ливан)

Чошанов Мурат Аширович – профессор кафедры математических наук и подготовки учителя Техас
ского университета, доктор педагогических наук, профессор, mouratt@utep.edu (Эль-Пасо, Техас, США) 

Чупрунов Евгений Владимирович – ректор ФГАОУ ВО «Национальный исследовательский 

Нижегородский государственный университет им. Н. И. Лобачевского», доктор физико-математических 
наук, профессор, rector@unn.ru (Нижний Новгород, Россия) 

Шафранов-Куцев Геннадий Филиппович – научный руководитель ФГАОУ ВО «Тюменский го
сударственный университет», доктор философских наук, профессор, академик РАО, ORCID: http://orcid.org/ 
0000-0001-7823-0525, g.f.kucev@utmn.ru (Тюмень, Россия)

Юсофф Сазали – директор Института педагогического образования Tuanku Bainun Campus (IPGKTB), 

Министерство образования Малайзии, доктор философии, sazali@iab.edu.my (Пенанг, Малайзия) 

Янчук Владимир Александрович – декан факультета профессионального развития специалистов 

образования ГУО «Академия последипломного образования», доктор психологических наук, профессор, 
ORCID: http://orcid.org/00000-0002-4524-8371, yanchuk1954@gmail.com (Минск, Республика Беларусь)

INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION. Vol. 21, no. 4. 2017

EDITORIAL BOARD

Sergey М. Vdovin – Editor in Chief, Rector of National Research Mordovia State University, Ph.D. 

(Economy), docent, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7363-1389, rector@adm.mrsu.ru (Saransk, Russia)

Sergey V. Polutin – Deputy Editor in Chief, Director of Research Institute of Regional Studies 

of National Research Mordovia State University, Dr.Sci. (Sociology), Professor, ORCID: http://orcid.
org/0000-0003-0399-4154, polutin.sergei@yandex.ru (Saransk, Russia)

Svetlana V. Gordina – Executive Editor, Ph.D. (Pedagogy), ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2265-418X, 

inted@adm.mrsu.ru, inted@mail.ru (Saransk, Russia)

Rayko M. Bukvich – Professor of Geographic institute “Jovan Cvijic” of Serbian Academy of Sciences 

and Arts, Dr.Sci. (Economy), Professor, r.bukvic@mail.ru (Belgrad, Serbia)

Angelo A. Camillo – Ph.D., Associate Professor of Management, School of Business, Woodbury Uni
versity, Angelo.Camillo@woodbury.edu (Burbank, USA)

Evgeniy V. Chuprunov – Rector of Lobachevsky University, Dr.Sci. (Phys.-Math.), Professor,  

rector@unn.ru (Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia)

Csaba Földes – Professor of Germanic Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities, University of Erfurt,  

foeldes@foeldes.eu (Erfurt, Germany)

Ilshat R. Gafurov – Rector of Kazan (Volga region) Federal University, Dr.Sci. (Economy), professor, 

public.mail@kpfu.ru (Kazan, Russia)

Samir Hamouda – Professor, Department of Physics, University of Benghazi, dr_s_hamouda@yahoo.ie 

(Benghazi, Libya)

Hanafy Holail – University President, AZM University, Ph.D., Professor, hholail@azmuniversity.edu.lb 

(Tripoli, Lebanon)

Jagbir Singh Kadyan – President, International Institute of Stress Management & Allied Sciences, New 

Delhi, India, Asst. Professor, Dept of Commerce, Swami Shraddhanand College, University of Delhi, India, 
M.Com (PIMR & Marketing); M.A (Eco); MMS (Fin); GDC&A; MIMA;  Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.), 
dr.jskadyan@gmail.com (New Delhi, India)

Olga V. Kirillova – President of the Russian Expert Council (REC), Representative of the REC in Scopus 

SCAB, President of Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers, Ph.D. (Engineering), ORCID: http://orcid.
org/0000-0002-0785-6181, ovkir@list.ru (Moscow, Russia)

Sagar Lalit Kumar – Vice Chancellor (President) of Himalayan University, Ph.D. (Education) & D.Litt. 

(Education), Professor, dr_lksagar@yahoo.co.in (New Delhi, India)

Nikolay P. Makarkin – President of National Research Mordovia State University, Dr.Sci. (Economy), 

professor, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3952-5811, makarkin@mrsu.ru (Saransk, Russia) 

Vladimir G. Maralov – Professor of Psychology Chair, Cherepovets State University, Dr.Sci. (Psy
chology), Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9627-2304, 
vgmaralov@yandex.ru (Cherepovets, Russia)

Stavros Mavroudeas – Professor of Political Economy, Department of Economics, University of Mace
donia, Ph.D., ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2230-7479, smavro@uom.edu.gr (Thessaloniki, Greece)

Galina V. Merzlyakova – Rector of Udmurt State University, Dr.Sci. (History), professor, rector@udsu.ru 

(Izhevsk, Russia)

Kamlesh Misra – Vice Chancellor, Ansal University, Ph.D. (Philosophy), misra1957@gmail.com 

(Gurgaon, India)

Gennady I. Sarantsev – Professor, Chair of Teaching Methodology for Mathematics, Mordovian State 

Pedagogical Institute named after M. E. Evseviev, Dr.Sci. (Pedagogy), ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-00021571-5100, gisarancev@mail.ru (Saransk, Russia)

Gennady F. Shafranov-Kutsev – Research Supervisor, Tyumen State University, Dr.Sci. (Philosophy), 

Professor, Member of the Russian Academy of Education, ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7823-0525, 
g.f.kucev@utmn.ru (Tyumen, Russia)

Mourat A. Тchoshanov – Professor, Departments of Mathematical Sciences and Teacher Education, 

University of Texas at El Paso, Texas, USA, Ph.D., mouratt@utep.edu (El Paso, Texas, USA)

José G. Vargas-Hernández – Member of the National System of Researchers of Mexico. Research 

professor at University Center of Economic and Managerial Sciences, University of Guadalajara, M.B.A.; 
Ph.D., jvargas2006@gmail.com (Guadalajara, Jalisco, México)

Vladimir A. Yanchuk – Dean of Faculty of Development for Specialists in Sphere of Education 

of Academy of Postgraduate Education, Dr.Sci. (Psychology), Professor, ORCID: http://orcid.org/ 
00000-0002-4524-8371, yanchuk1954@gmail.com (Minsk, Belarus)

Sazali Yusoof – Director at Institute of Teacher Education Tuanku Bainun Campus, Ministry of Edu
cation Malaysia, Ph.D., sazali@iab.edu.my (Pinang, Malaysia)

ИНТЕГРАЦИЯ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ. Т. 21, № 4. 2017

COДЕРЖАНИЕ

Международный опыт интеграции образования

Н. В. Колачева, Н. Н. Кошелева, A. Я. Пардала. Социальные аспекты  

интеграции образования (по результатам опроса о ЕГЭ  
и доступности образования) ....................................................................................... 580

Ж. Г. Гаранина, Н. В. Андронова, Л. И. Лашмайкина, О. Е. Мальцева,  

О. Е. Поляков. Структурная модель личностно-профессионального саморазвития  
будущих специалистов ..................................................................................................... 596

Т. С. Макарова, Е. Е. Матвеева, М. А. Молчанова, Е. А. Морозова,  

Н. В. Буренина. Руководство проектной деятельностью слепых  
и слабовидящих, изучающих английский язык ............................................................ 609

Модернизация образования

В. В. Андреев, Р. Я. Гибадулин, Г. Проданов, Р. И. Жданов.

Институт перспективных исследований – новая форма подготовки  
педагогических кадров высшей квалификации в России ........................................... 623

Б. И. Бедный, О. А. Кузенков. Интегрированные программы подготовки  

научно-педагогических кадров высшей квалификации ................................................ 637

Г. Ф. Шафранов-Куцев, Л. В. Гуляева. Исследование конкурентоориентированности 

современных старшеклассников: актуальные тенденции  
и перспективы формирования (на примере Тюменской области) .............................. 651

О. В. Рогач, Т. М. Рябова, Е. В. Фролова. Анализ проблем управления  

инновационным развитием школьного образования в современной России ............. 669

Психология образования

М. М. Кашапов, Г. Л. Шаматонова, А. С. Кашапов, И. В. Отставнова. Ресурсность  

мышления как средство реализации творческого потенциала личности ................... 683

А. В. Лебедев, Н. И. Айзман, М. А. Суботялов, А. Д. Герасёв, Р. И. Айзман. 

Оценка склонностей к психосоциальным зависимостям среди  
студентов 17–18 лет г. Новосибирска ......................................................................... 695

Академическая интеграция

Е. Э. Шишлова, И. А. Курицын. Скрытое содержание профессионального  

языкового образования в социокультурном измерении .............................................. 709

И. В. Цветкова, Т. Н. Иванова. Социальные критерии экологической  

ответственности молодежи .............................................................................................. 723

О. В. Лебедева, И. В. Гребенев, Е. О. Морозова. Исследовательское обучение  

в системе уроков физики ................................................................................................ 736

М. В. Мосин, Л. П. Водясова, Н. М. Мосина, Н. В. Чинаева.  

Дидактический потенциал билингвизма в обучении иностранному языку ................ 751

Отзыв публикации ................................................................................................................. 765

Информация для авторов и читателей ............................................................................ 766

Информация для авторов и читателей (на англ. яз.) .................................................... 768

ISSN 1991-9468 (Print), 2308-1058 (Online)
http://edumag.mrsu.ru

INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION. Vol. 21, no. 4. 2017

http://edumag.mrsu.ru
ISSN 1991-9468 (Print), 2308-1058 (Online)

CONTENTS

International Experience in the Integration of Education 

N. V. Kolacheva, N. N. Kosheleva, A. Ya. Pardala. Social Aspects of Education  

Integration (Based on Survey Findings on Uniform State Examination  
and Education Affordability) ............................................................................................ 580

Zh. G. Garanina, N. V. Andronova, L. I. Lashmaykina, O. E. Maltseva,  

O. E. Polyakov. The Structural Model of Future Employees’ Personal  
and Professional Self-Development ................................................................................ 596

T. S. Makarova, E. E. Matveeva, M. A. Molchanova, E. A. Morozova,  

N. V. Burenina. Project Work Management Addressing the Needs  
of BVI Learners of EFL ................................................................................................ 609

Modernization of Education

V. V. Andreev, R. Ya. Gibadulin, G. Prodanov, R. I. Zhdanov. Russian Institute for 

Advanced Study as a New Form of Training of Highly Trained Teaching Staff .......... 623

B. I. Bednyi, O. A. Kuzenkov. Integrated Programmes for Master’s Degree  

and PhD Students .......................................................................................................... 637

G. F. Shafranov-Kutsev, L. V. Gulyaeva. Research of Competitive  

Orientation Among Secondary School Seniour Students:  
Current Trends and Prospects for Nurturing (Case Study of Tyumen Region) ............. 651

O. V. Rogach, T. M. Ryabova, E. V. Frolova. Analysis of Problems in Managing  

the Innovative Development of Secondary Education in Modern Russia ...................... 669

Psychology of Education

M. M. Kashapov, G. L. Shamatonova, A. S. Kashapov, I. V. Otstavnova. Resource- 

Based Thinking as a Means of Implementation of Personality’s Creative Potential ...... 683

A. V. Lebedev, N. I. Aizman, M. A. Subotyalov, A. D. Gerasеv, R. I. Aizman.  

Psychosocial Addiction Assessment Among 17‒18-year Old  
Students of Novosibirsk ................................................................................................. 695

Academic Integration

E. E. Shishlova, I. A. Kuritsyn. Sociocultural Dimension of Hidden Content  

in a Professional Language Curriculum ........................................................................... 709

I. V. Tsvetkova, T. N. Ivanova. Social Criteria of Young People’s Environmental 

Responsibility ................................................................................................................ 723

O. V. Lebedeva, I. V. Grebenev, E. O. Morozova. Inquiry-Based Learning  

for Physics Courses within the Russian Schooling System ........................................... 736

M. V. Mosin, L. P. Vodyasova, N. M. Mosina, N. V. Chinaeva.  

Bilingualism’s Didactic Potential in Teaching a Foreign Language..................................751

Retraction Note ........................................................................................................................... 765

Information for Authors and Readers of the Journal ........................................................ 766

Information for Authors and Readers of the Journal (in English) .................................... 768

ИНТЕГРАЦИЯ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ. Т. 21, № 4. 2017

УДК 37.043.2-055.1/.2=111

Social Aspects of Education Integration (Based on 

Survey Findings on Uniform State Examination 

and Education Affordability)

N. V. Kolachevaa*, N. N. Koshelevaa, A. Ya. Pardalab

a Togliatti State University, Togliatti, Russia,

* ncolacheva@mail.ru

b Radom Academy of Economics, Radom, Poland  

Introduction: the purpose of this article is to study the opinion of interested and non-professional segment 
of society regarding the Uniform State Exam on mathematics and affordability of higher education in Russia. The authors checked the hypothesis of interconnection between social opinion and changes in the exam 
procedure, economic and socio-demographic situation, educational system reformation and integration of 
educational space in the RF and other countries.
Materials and Methods: we studied the survey data of students in Togliatti State University, their parents 
or legal representatives between 2009–2016. We processed the results by methods of probability assessment 
with the help of complex features reflecting possibilities of the applicants admitted to higher educational 
institutions and social affordability of higher education. 
Results: we theoretically grounded and developed the method of social opinion study about the Uniform 
State Exam and affordability of higher education in the region. Dynamics of social opinion was studied with 
the help of adapted probability rates describing either quantitative or qualitative features of social processes. 
We studied and analyzed scientific papers devoted to the attitude of society to secondary school final exams, 
admission to higher education institutions, and social mobility of the applicants and determined theoretical 
background of education space integration with the education systems of other countries. 
Discussion and Conclusions: the research showed that even in the region with visible economic and socio-demographic problems the concerned part of society gradually understands that the Uniform State Exam 
serves to keep education quality in the country making it more affordable. The results of the study may be 
useful to specialists in the field of education, as well as interesting to the general public.

Keywords: mathematics Uniform State Exam, affordability of higher education, higher education institution, 
education integration, social opinion, social mobility of applicants and students

For citation: Kolacheva N.V., Kosheleva N.N., Pardala A.Ya. Social aspects of education integration (based 
on survey findings on Uniform State Examination and education affordability). Integratsiya obrazovaniya =  
Integration of Education. 2017; 21(4):580-595. DOI: 10.15507/1991-9468.089.021.201704.580-595

© Kolacheva N. V., Kosheleva N. N., Pardala A.Ya., 2017

DOI: 10.15507/1991-9468.089.021.201704.580-595

http://edumag.mrsu.ru
ISSN 1991-9468 (Print), 2308-1058 (Online)

МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫЙ ОПЫТ  

ИНТЕГРАЦИИ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ /  

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE IN THE  

INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION

INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION. Vol. 21, no. 4. 2017

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE IN THE INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION

Cоциальные аспекты интеграции образования 
(по результатам опроса о ЕГЭ и доступности 

образования)

Н. В. Колачева1*, Н. Н. Кошелева1, A. Я. Пардала2

1 ФГБОУ ВО «Тольяттинский государственный университет», 

г. Тольятти, Россия,
* ncolacheva@mail.ru

2 Академия Экономики в Радоме, г. Радом, Польша

Введение: цель статьи – изучение мнения заинтересованной, не профессиональной, части общества 
относительно единого государственного экзамена по математике и доступности высшего образования 
в России. Авторами проверена гипотеза взаимосвязи общественного мнения с изменениями процедуры экзамена, экономической и социально-демографической ситуацией, реформированием системы 
образования, интеграцией образовательного пространства России и других стран.
Материалы и методы: исследовались данные опроса студентов Тольяттинского государственного 
университета за 2009–2016 гг., их родителей или законных представителей. Обработка результатов 
выполнена на основе методов вероятностной оценки с помощью комплексных характеристик, отражающих возможности абитуриентов при поступлении в высшие учебные заведения и социальную 
доступность высшего образования.
Результаты исследования: теоретически обоснована и разработана методика изучения общественного мнения о ЕГЭ и доступности высшего образования на уровне региона. Динамика общественного 
мнения исследована при помощи адаптированных вероятностных показателей, позволяющих описать 
как количественные, так и качественные характеристики социальных процессов. Изучены и проанализированы работы ученых, касающиеся отношения общества к школьным выпускным экзаменам, 
поступлению в высшие учебные заведения и социальной мобильности абитуриентов. 
Обсуждение и заключения: исследование достаточно полно показало: даже в регионе с видимыми 
экономическими и социально-демографическими проблемами заинтересованная часть общества пришла к пониманию того, что единый государственный экзамен способствует сохранению качественного 
образования в стране, в то же время делая его более доступным. Практическая значимость статьи заключается в выявленной положительной тенденции изменения общественного мнения заинтересованной 
части общества относительно ЕГЭ по математике в РФ. Результаты проведенного исследования могут 
быть полезны специалистам в области образования, а также интересны широкой общественности.

Ключевые слова: единый государственный экзамен по математике, доступность образования, высшее 
учебное заведение, интеграция образования, общественное мнение, социальная мобильность абитуриентов и студентов

Для цитирования: Колачева Н. В., Кошелева Н. Н., Пардала А. Я. Социальные аспекты интеграции образования (по результатам опроса о ЕГЭ и доступности образования) // Интеграция образования. 2017. Т. 21, № 4.  
С. 580–595. DOI: 10.15507/1991-9468.089.021.201704.580-595

Introduction

The Russian society keeps disputing 

about final USE at secondary schools. After 
the Russian Federation signed the Bologna 
Declaration 2003, USE was announced 
one of the points of education reform in 
Russia. We would like to recall that the 
aim of the Bologna process is convergence 
and harmonization of education system in 
European countries and creation of uniform 
European space of higher education [1]. 
Now 47 countries take part in this process, 
where exams similar to Russian USE exist. 

There are three main positions related 

to USE: its full cancellation, support or improvement. Pedagogues met USE introduc
tion in Russia cautiously but took it more 
loyally over time. We cannot say the same 
about the rest of Russian people. Their 
idea about USE bases on media publications. After introducing USE as experiment, 
(2001–2008), the attitude of population 
to it was sharply negative, as to all new, 
unknown, criticised. Then the authors had 
an idea of annual social research in Samara 
region devoted to opinion of secondary 
school graduates and their parents about 
USE, its results and consequences. The 
research was done by the chair “Advanced 
Mathematics and Mathematical Modeling” 
of TSU and covered the school graduates 
who sat mathematics examination in 2009–

ИНТЕГРАЦИЯ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ. Т. 21, № 4. 2017

МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫЙ ОПЫТ ИНТЕГРАЦИИ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ 

2016 and entered TSU by results of USE, 
and their parents (legal representatives).

Already 15 years had passed since 

experimental USE introduction in Samara 
region, and for over 8 years, USE results 
had become mandatory for admission to 
HEI. This period was enough to get used 
to new format of the exam and admission. 
Due to annual surveys, the authors had  
a possibility to see changes in opinion of 
secondary school graduates and their parents. The main objective of this research 
was the study of opinion of interested, nonprofessional segment of society regarding 
USE and higher education affordability, 
linkage between these opinions and processes going in the region. The research 
problem of this article touches the social 
aspects of mathematics education and its 
integration into European one, USE and 
higher education affordability in particular, 
and their connection with events happening 
in the region. The factors hypothetically 
influencing on social attitude are the following: changes in the examine process, 
education reform, Russian education integration with other countries, changes in 
economic and socio-demographic situation.

The authors developed a methodologi
cal approach to the problem of research. 
These methods let, in the course of literature study, theoretical preparation to 
research done and analysis of collected 
empirical materials, to establish a theory 
and ways of studying dynamics of public 
opinion regarding mathematics USE and 
higher education affordability on regional 
level. We made a theory base for probability rates describing both quantitative and 
qualitative features of studied processes 
and adopted them for this research. The 
factors effecting on social opinion in this 
range of problems were fixed. We studied 
and analyzed a number of research works 
regarding public attitude to secondary 
school final exams and admission to HEI. 
We determined theoretical background of 
education integration space in our region 
with education systems of other countries.

The authors identified opinion trends 

of school graduates of the region and their 
parents, about math USE and possibility 

of admission by its results to HEI. We 
processed the results of surveys and studied them with the help of probability rates 
and determined the grade of influence of 
many factors on social opinion. We also 
compared the conclusion with results of 
studies by other scholars. After integration process of domestic and European 
education systems status estimation at the 
regional level, we analyzed the possibilities 
of integration extension.

The works of such eminent mathemati
cians as N. Rozov [2], G. Malinetskiy [3], 
and others contain ideas of USE being an 
integration form of Russian education with 
education of developed western countries. 
As our experience shows, most of students 
in a regional HEI do not attach such meaning to USE. Most of them are sure that in 
other countries exams are easier because 
they have no USE. It is widely believed 
that to pass an exam in your own school 
would be easier and results would be much 
better. Such an attitude comes from family 
and school, under the influence of parents, 
teachers, speeches and media publications. 
However, most of respondents answered 
positively the question about fairness of 
their mathematics USE score and necessity of this exam nowadays; that in whole 
contradicts to this situation.

Actually, practice of such exams exists 

worldwide. Particularly in Poland, there is 
exam called Matura, similar exams are in 
other European countries. At the same time 
there is no exact similarity, each country 
has its own process for final school exams 
and HEI admission rules. For example, in 
Poland there is basic and advanced type 
of mathematics exam, in Russia basic and 
core levels of the USE relatively. In very 
few countries, Ministry of education so 
totally controls USE process as in Russia. 
During transfer to testing exams in Russia, 
the authors of test assignments were oriented on western systems and in particular 
at the USA experience. American prototype of USE is American College Testing. 
However, the experts say that Russian 
analogue differs significantly from ACT, 
and not to the better [4]. The main distinction of American predecessor from Russian 

INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION. Vol. 21, no. 4. 2017

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE IN THE INTEGRATION OF EDUCATION

equivalent is the part called “scientific 
thinking”. Here it needs to understand and 
analyze certain information and the object 
of research, to evaluate two or three alternative assumptions, theories or point of 
view on some notable phenomena1. This 
very part often plays a crucial role when 
admitting to a HEI. 

In Russia very often controversial situ
ations and problems occurred that attracted 
the attention of journalists to USE and have 
always been under wide public discussion 
[5]. All-Russia center of studying of public 
opinion and fund “Social opinion” annually 
publish social surveys data about USE2. By 
materials of these surveys, we can conclude 
that schoolchildren showing good results 
at the exams, their parents and teachers are 
gradually accustomed to USE estimate it 
positively. We cannot say the same about 
schoolchildren with low USE scores and 
people not participating in USE process 
but only having heard of it. 

Literature Review

In Russia, a great deal of scholarly 

articles are devoted to pupils trainings for 
USE, to analysis of its results on various 
school subjects, the structure and content of 
test assignments, process of exam, to HEI 
admission and other relating problems. It is 
noted, “USE is necessary as an instrument 
of knowledge quality value and consequently, of social leveling when admitting 
young people to HEI” and we need to stop 
complicating admission process3. The USE 
process being analyzed, various arguments 
“for” and “against” USE are discussed, 
founded recommendation to change USE 
and separate school from USE suggested 
[6; 7]. Many studies are devoted to USE 
application for quality value of school education [8; 9]. One of the most discussed and 
criticized is mathematics USE, since this 
exam is essential for all school graduates 
and its specific contributes.

The publications about social opinion 

regarding USE based on social survey are 

very interesting. Schoolteachers convincing pupils in USE complexity and a chance 
to have a low score put schoolchildren in 
alert before exam. Therefore, the survey 
made in 2012 among teachers of two Russian cities Omsk and Tumen (2 156 res- 
pondents) showed that the attitude to USE 
of most of them was negative [10]. 

One of the ideas predetermining USE 

introduction was social affordability of 
higher education. In Russia, as worldwide, 
there are well-known instruments providing advantages for admission to HEI for 
the children from wealthy families. Family 
income and education, its social and cultural 
resources influence greatly at applicants’ 
social mobility [11]. The results of some 
public surveys done by Russian scholars 
could confirm it [12–14]. In so-called “selective” or “prestigious” HEI mostly the 
children of most successful parents study 
[12; 15]. Graduating from different HEI, 
the graduates have unequal opportunities in 
future employment [16; 17]. There are studies showing that students from less wealthy 
families have less social mobility, they 
could have had higher incomes if they had 
graduated a more “selective” HEI [18–20]. 
In developed countries, there is support for 
applicants from different social groups aiming to align the opportunities of applicants 
and students for higher education [21]. 

Thus, we studied and analyzed the 

works of scholars regarding the public attitude to school final exams and admission 
to HEI by USE results. Many aspects of 
USE organization and admitting to Russian HEI by its results studied well enough 
in details in domestic academic articles. 
Among them, the works regarding expert 
evaluation in this field prevail. There are 
also studies basing on a number of social 
surveys about USE. But interconnection 
of USE and higher education affordability 
in Russia needs deeper studying. At the 
same time, foreign scholars have been for 
years studying in details the affordability 
of higher education and social mobility of 

1 The ACT [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://www.actstudent.org (дата обращения: 10.01.2017).
2 Не полюбившийся ЕГЭ. Данные фонда «Общественное мнение» // Отечественные записки. 2012. 

№ 4 (49). С. 92–94. URL: http://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=19413339 (дата обращения: 25.11.2016).

3 Смирнов И. П. ЕГЭ: великий и ужасный // Профессиональное образование. Столица. 2015.  

№ 7. С. 1. URL: http://m-profobr.com/files/------------7,-2015.pdf (дата обращения: 02.12.2016).

ИНТЕГРАЦИЯ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ. Т. 21, № 4. 2017

МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫЙ ОПЫТ ИНТЕГРАЦИИ ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ 

applicants and students. Having analyzed 
these works, we conclude that one of the 
theoretical backgrounds of education integration in our region and other countries is 
the affordability of quality higher education at home country for bright and talented 
applicants independently of their social status. In turn, the level and quality of higher 
education should ensure graduates’ social 
mobility and worthy job either in home 
country or abroad. In integrated education, 
only equal possibilities can be positive 
without loss in academic, education and 
cultural capital of the region. There are 
such universities in Russia but in general, 
social security system for students in our 
HEI is insufficient [22]. Due to strong social support programs for students, increase 
of education services export in other countries we observe the intensifying migration 
of talented applicants from Russia abroad 

instead of mutually advantageous integration of higher education now [23].

Materials and Methods

Materials for study included the survey 

of the 1st year TSU students taking profile 
mathematics USE. We used the following 
methodology of a survey. Questionnaire 
included information about a respondent 
and his/her USE score in mathematics,  
7 questions for the student and 5 for his/her 
legal representative. We selected students 
by a random repetition-free method without 
systematic errors that correctly represented 
the proportion of general population. About 
92 % of survey participants were from 
Samara region including 77 % of Togliatti 
inhabitants, the rest were from Ulyanovsk, 
Saratov, Orenburg and other regions. More 
than 5 000 students and almost as many 
adults participated (table1).

Т а b l e  1.  The number of respondents between 2009–2016 respectively
Т а б л и ц а  1.  Количество участников опроса в 2009–2016 гг.

The sample proportion was 0,196 

(19,6 %) from the total number of 1st year 
TSU students, full-time course. For this 
sample maximum size of representativeness error at the level of confidence 
probability is 0,95 (95 %) not increasing  
1,24 %, that let spread the survey results 
to all 1st year TSU students. Total number 
of respondents was 10 106, and 9 196 of 
them were Togliatti inhabitants. According 
to statistics, the number of school graduates constituted more than 3 000 people 
in 2015, nearly the same in 2016, but in 

2009–2014, this number fluctuated from  
4 000 to 5 000. Today TSU have about 80 % 
of Togliatti secondary school graduates 
(about 75 % for the years of the survey) 
coming to our University; that is why this 
research represents social opinion of Togliatti secondary school students, their parents 
and legal representatives at the significance 
point of 0,05 %. 

We processed the data by probability 

rates reflecting possibilities of applicants 
when entering a HEI and social affordability of higher education in the region [24].

Number of 1st year 

students / Количество 

студентов 

Ι курса очной формы 

обучения 

The year of the survey / Год опроса

Total / 
Итого
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016

Total, people / Всего, чел.
3 030
3 114
3 421
2 914
3 106
3 450
3 151
3 645
25 831

Respondents, people / 
Опрошено, чел.
783
754
632
585
567
587
541
604
5 053

Respondents, % of total 
number / Опрошено, в % 
от общего количества

25,8
24,2
18,5
20,0
18,3
17,0
17,1
16,7
19,6

Respondents, parents 
or legal representatives, 
people / Опрошено 
родителей или законных 
представителей, чел.

781
754
632
584
567
587
541
603
5 049