DIRECTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT OF BRICS HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEMS: SELF-UNDERSTANDING AND SELF-PRESENTATION OF CHINESE AND RUSSIAN UNIVERSITIES

  • D.I. Kokin
    • Ural Federal University named after the First President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin
  • K.B. Lozovskaya
    • Ural Federal University named after the First President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin
  • E.S. Purgina
    • Ural Federal University named after the First President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin
Keywords: BRICS, modernity, web-sites of universities, Russian universities, Chinese universities, higher education, global education market

Abstract

In the modern world, universities have become actors in the global market of higher education while retaining their connections with national higher education systems and staying embedded in their national culture and traditions. In this light, self-narratives of BRICS universities are of particular interest as they not only reflect these HEIs' understanding of their purpose and role in the national and international contexts but also the self-understandings of their national higher education systems. This study analyzes texts and visual elements of web-sites of Russian and Chinese universities as a part of their self-narratives and as means they use for communication with internal and external audiences. The study relies on the methodology of critical discourse analysis developed by Michelle Stack and the principles of multimodal analysis proposed by Luc Pauwels. The sample consists of five Russian and five Chinese HEIs which occupy top positions in QS University Ranking for BRICS 2019. National (Russian, Chinese) and international (English) versions of these universities' sites are analyzed. The study shows that Russian and Chinese universities are oriented primarily towards such key stakeholders as prospective students, current students and their families, and governmental agencies. Universities use their web-sites for promoting their brands among prospective students, both domestic and international, and for self-legitimization in the eyes of national governments. It was found that Chinese universities are generally more consistent in their pursuit of internationalization. Both Russian and Chinese universities, however, appear to be more focused on attracting international students rather than on establishing and developing official partnerships and academic collaborations. In their narratives, Chinese universities present themselves as rightful players on the global market that, while being embedded in national tradition and committed to innovation, are able to determine the future of the region and world in general. Russian universities, in their turn, seek to demonstrate their active involvement into the global academic context by highlighting their positions in world university rankings.

References

Received 2020-10-20
Published 2020-12-28
Section
Sociology
Pages
375-384