13. Higher education in Russia and abroad

Raising evidence-based policymaking and
internationalization of the Russian higher
education system (P174528)
NOTE 1
Trigger student mobility for enhanced
development in higher education
31 May 2021
Fabrice Hénard, Director of Learning Avenue and international consultant
Ekaterina Minaeva, Analyst, Laboratory for University Development, Institute of Education,
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Oleg Leshukov, Head of the Laboratory for University Development, Institute of Education,
National Research University Higher School of Economics
Polina Zavalina, Consultant, World Bank
Table of content
I. SUMMARY
3
II. INTRODUCTION
6
III. BACKGROUND ANALYSIS
6
A.
Internationalization and international student mobility in Russia: an overview of
trends
6
B.
Value of international student mobility
13
C.
National policy measures to trigger internationalization
15
D.
Challenges and trends during the COVID-19 pandemics
17
IV. INTERNATIONAL ANALYSIS
20
A.
Internationalization and international student mobility worldwide: an overview of
trends
20
B.
Value of international student mobility
26
C.
National policy measure meant to trigger internationalization: a global outlook 28
D.
Global challenges and trends during the COVID-19 pandemics
30
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
33
ANNEX: DEFINITION
39
REFERENCES
40
2
I. Summary
I) Background Analysis of international mobility in Russia
Russian education model on internationalization was inherited from the Soviet period. Under
revision, the model needs to be adopted to the current political ambitions and public goals.
Improving education export is a priority in the Russian government’s agenda; with an
increasing number of Federal projects addressing the issue over the past 5 years and with a
large volume of international students welcomed in the country (353,300 in 2020). There are
several pull-factors which attract international students to study in Russia: low tuition fee
policies, language, quality of education is certain fields, attractive job market (for students
from CIS countries), family connections with Russia, beneficial political and economic
connections between students' country of residence and Russia. On the other hand, the most
significant challenges that hinder student mobility to Russia include language barrier and low
number of English-taught programs, rather low visibility of Russian universities in the global
education market, as well as lack of information about Russia as a study destination, unclear
and complex admission procedures, and unclear perspectives after graduation. The most
fundamental issue with student mobility in Russia, however, is the unclear motivation and
goal of inbound mobility: while the number of incoming students is growing, it is unclear what
outcome is prioritized for the national economy and academia.
The higher education community and decision makers value international student mobility
through several main rationales (de Wit, 2015): economic rationales (gaining revenue from
tuition fees and other incomes), political rationales (soft power), talent attraction, academic
development, cooperation and internationalization of universities. To reap those benefits,
National and Federal projects have been implemented: “Education export” (already
integrated into other projects) at the federal level (targeting to reach 425,000 international
students by 2024), «Priority 2030» at the national level (aiming to foster universities impact
on economic, technological and digital development of Russian economy).
To enhance international student mobility and to effectively implement good practices,
Russian education system needs, first, to tackle pre-existing challenges; inadequacy of
educational programs’ content, lack of key actors’ collaboration and insufficient research
and analysis. Finally, Covid-19 pandemic revealed considerable challenges: lack of
organization of study process and psychological support, limited online recruitment
instruments, low diversification of education products, rigid visa regulations for international
students, shortfalls in recruitment at the national level, absence of systematic methodological
and organizational support, and complex admissions procedure. The importance of
internationalization of higher education is not only linked to “education export” meaning
increasing the revenues of Russian HEI. This is already mentioned in section III.B on the value
of internationalization.
A high level of internationalization is very much a key feature of world-class higher education
systems and institutions. Top-notch international faculty and students do not only raise the
quality of teaching, learning and research, they also provide valuable networks for institutions
and bring fresh ideas – not only in their areas of expertise but also on the organization of
higher education – to their receiving countries. Therefore, national tertiary education systems
3
and institutions across the globe are increasingly competing for talent and are well advised to
raise their game in this competition.
II) International Analysis
The internationalization of higher education consists at first in international student mobility
but should also be understood in a comprehensive way; integrating policies, programs,
initiatives, and individuals (e.g., evolvement of programs and higher education institutions
cross borders, of curriculum and pedagogical tools, of international research collaborations).
However, for the purpose of this note, the focus will remain mobility.
Recent trends in international student mobility are underlined by increasing demand and
diversification of destinations. English-speaking countries have been the most attractive
destinations but at the regional level, Europe remains the first one. The pandemic in 2020
have led to heavy drops in the number of international students enrolled in some countries
whereas other countries like China have gained increasing influence. New forms of
internationalization are also expanding. Internationalization at Home and other forms are
more integrated in the HEIs objectives and actions via Higher Education Networks such as the
European Higher Education Area (EHEA). Moreover, constraints created by Covid-19 might
give way to opportunities in improving health and legal status of the host country and
teaching as well as in enhancing outreach in student recruitment.
International Student mobility contributes to financial and academic aspirations of the host
country both by financial and non-financial benefits. However, it is not as simple to conduct
mobility programs and meaningful internationalization, which are mutually beneficial to
students and universities. Hence, recently, the value of internationalization is questioned due
to its practice as an end and not means. The inclusion of internationalization indicators in
university ranking systems is just one of the phenomena that contributed to evaluating
internationalization by only looking at inputs (e.g., number of exchange agreements) or
outputs (e.g., percentage of outgoing students), rather than looking at impact. To remedy the
issue, setting up quality assurance arrangements is key. For instance, it recommends the
incorporation of a code of ethics in Internationalization processes, which ensures that ISM
practices effectively achieve expected outcomes (rather than mere outputs). Finally, good
practices, at the international level, can guide governments and universities to achieve
meaningful internationalization: integrating a code of ethical standards towards foreign
students in national qualification and quality assurance framework via accreditation of
programs, regulations regarding student evaluations of teaching careers and aligning
institutional and national goals and practices of internationalization. Strategies on
internationalization cover areas which target a wide array of goals, from funding to facilitating
access: they can be targeted at individuals (grants, scholarships and fee waiving), at improving
the learning environment and international programs (migration and visa policy,
employment/research/career opportunities, etc.). Those incentives can also be universityspecific, or undertaken thanks to cooperation of teaching, learning and research (national,
regional, and institutional networks).
4
III)
Recommendations
International student recruitment in Russia faces several barriers (such as language barrier or
the lack of competitive programs) and is expected to focus on four main goals: increasing its
capacity as a study destination, increase its financial revenue, become a talent attraction,
and improve its soft power. This note pinpoints some strategic adjustments needed to attract
more international students which start by conducting marketing analysis of the priority
education markets. This will allow the competent authorities to expand the set of educational
export-oriented products and broaden the representation of Russian universities in the
market of online programs. Russian universities are also expected to increase their
attractiveness by supporting convenient services for international students and providing
the right environment to attract students from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
5
II. Introduction
The Note 1 “Trigger student mobility for enhanced development in higher education” exposes
the range of country-specific and international challenges on international student mobility1
and provides recommendations for Russia, at a critical time as the Covid-19 pandemic; and
where the post-Soviet period model is being reconsidered2.
The number of international students in Russia is relatively high (353,000 people as of 2020),
and currently Russia is the 7th largest recipient of international students. Nevertheless, some
key factors and their multiple implications create risks of underuse for the export potential
of Russian education.
Education export can benefit the host country in contributing to its overall development. It
can do so with direct financial benefits (via tuition fees and day to day revenues), however in
2018, income from educational services for international students at Russian institutions was
only RUB 13 billion (Monitoring of Efficiency of Higher Education Institutions of the Russian
Ministry of Science and Education, 2018): 2% of the total public expenditure on higher
education (RUB 554 billion). Other economic benefits such as increasing the number of skilled
workers for the development of the national job market are not well exploited in Russia
(further developed in Note 2 “Attract and retain international students: a remedy to skill
shortages”). The note indicates that relevant national strategies and good practices aiming
to reap those benefits include incentives targeting individuals (student aid programs),
incentives targeting teaching, learning and employability (government spending in
international academic mobility programs for example) and cooperation to increase HEIs’
attractiveness.
To effectively implement good practices targeted at enhancing student mobility in Russian
education system, the hereby “Note 1” proposes to tackle both pre-existing and pandemicrelated challenges. The preexisting challenges are three-fold: educational programs’ content
(which lack diversification and comprehensive internationalization), lack of key actors’
collaboration (which necessitates coordinated action at central, regional and institutional
level) and insufficient research and analysis (with a specific focus on internationalization at
the national higher education system). Challenges emerging in the pandemic context, pose
potential threats at the regulatory and organization level (e.g., visa procedures, emergency
coordination between actors) for the ongoing or upcoming Russian initiatives.
III. Background Analysis
A. Internationalization and international student mobility in Russia: an overview of trends
Historical background and context of internationalization in Russia
1 Internationally mobile student (UNESCO, OECD): An internationally mobile student is one who crosses a border for the
purpose of pursuing his or her studies and is enrolled in an educational program outside his or her country of origin. Only
students enrolled in a program leading to a degree are counted.
2 Underlined by a big share of international students from the post-Soviet countries as well as from India and China, by
relatively low tuition fees, and finally by teaching provided in Russian.
6
Currently, Russian model of student mobility inherits many features from the Soviet model.
During the Soviet period, Russia was the third leading state in education export after the USA
and France: the enrolment of international students in the Soviet Union increased from 5,900
students in the 1950s to 26,000 in the 1970s and 126,500 by the 1990s (Portal Ministerstva
Obrazovanija I Nauki RF, n.d.).
During the 1950-1990s, the rationales for international student recruitment in Russian were
mostly political and it served as an instrument of soft power both by Russia and by the USA
(Nye, 2004; de Wit, 2019). Students came to Russia for short-term as well as degree studies,
and the majority of international students were coming from Socialistic bloc (Kuraev, 2014).
In addition, Soviet Union actively promoted Russian language abroad, and actively attracted
students from South-East Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. The financial rationale and
the revenue from education export were not considered as priorities (de Wit. et al., 2021).
In the first decade after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the number of international students
in Russia decreased to 39,000 students in just one year (Kuraev, 2014). The major main drain
in academia, stagnation at the job market and overall political and economic instability in
Russia in the 1990s, international student recruitment was a challenge, and certainly was not
a priority during that decade (de Wit et al., 2021).
At the moment, Russian model of education export still has many features inherited from the
Soviet period (a big share of international students from the post-Soviet countries, relatively
low tuition fee, student flows from India and China, teaching predominantly in Russian for
international students) however, this model is being reshaped and reconsidered. The
recognition of the importance of education export as a national priority can be seen from the
number of Federal projects for support on international student mobility launched within the
past 5 years.
The shift in the policy focus and increased attention to education export in Russia is explained
by several factors:
1. Overarching strategy for moving towards non-resource-based export economic
model,
2. Increased global competition for talent,
3. Support of development and competitiveness of Russian universities.
Over the past decade, Russia has demonstrated a consistent growth in international
enrollments (Fig. 1), and in 2020 the number of international students in Russia reached
353,300 people over a total of 4 million students (8% of the total).
7
Fig. 1. Number of international students in Russia, 2013-2020
Source: Project Atlas, Institute of International Education
283921
296176
313089
334497
353331
250200
225300
198500
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
The rate follows in Russia are correlating with the general average of the other countries in the region
except China. For comparison:
 In Japan, statistics from 2020 show that over 2,92 million students, 279,597 were
international (9%).
 In South Korea, there were about 2 million students enrolled in universities in 2019, and the
number of international students were 160,000 (8%).
 The number of students enrolled in higher education in China remains around 40 million by
2018, hosting 458,520 international students (1%).
Other big markets of international students such as Europe, show different patterns. In 2017, the EU
had a total of 38,2 million students, welcoming 1,7 million international students (4%). However,
intraregional mobility is very high in the region: 86% of outwardly mobile European students remain
in Europe.
The major sending countries are shown on Fig. 2. Historically, the share of students from the
post-Soviet countries is considerable (more than 60%), due to the lack of the language and
cultural barriers for this group of students, family ties with Russia, a preferential tuition fee
policy for students from CIS countries. In addition, many Russian-speaking students outside
Russia see studying in Russia as the path to the attractive job market.
Among the non-CIS countries, China and India are the only states presented in the top-10
sending countries. Other regions include South-East Asia (Malaysia, Mongolia, Vietnam),
West, Central and South Africa (Angola, Nigeria), North Africa and Middle East (Tunisia, Egypt,
Jordan, Syria, Iran, Iraq).
8
Fig. 2. Top-10 countries of origin of international students in Russia, 2020
Source: Project Atlas, Institute of International Education
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
67831
37515 35261
28883
20752 18803
15151
11040 10374 8123
The most popular subjects among international students in Russia are Healthcare (around
20%), Economics and Management, and Humanities. Students who take pre-sessional
Russian language courses also have a significant share in the student population - about 8,5%.
Fig. 3. Distribution of international students in Russia by the field of study, 2018
Healthcare
Economics and management
Humanities
Russian language courses
Education
Law
Mettalurgy
Geology and exploration of natural resources
Informatics
Power engineering
Agriculture
Art and culture
Russian linguistics
Physics and mathematics
0,00%
20%
13,20%
11,40%
8,50%
3,60%
3,30%
3,20%
3,00%
3,00%
2,90%
2,50%
2,50%
2,40%
2,40%
5,00%
10,00%
15,00%
20,00%
25,00%
The majority of degree-seeking international students are enrolled at the bachelor level, and
approximately 10% of students take Master courses which is a very low share compared to
other main exporters of education (Fig. 4). While the data on this is lacking, the possible
explanations for the low number of Master students can include low diversification of
education products at the Master’s level, low level of attractiveness of the job market
compared to other education exporters (which is further developed in Note 2 “Attract and
retain international students: a remedy to skill shortages”) and lack of English-taught Master’s
programs. School education is not considered to be a significant part of education export in
Russia. Short-term credit-seeking students are also not represented on Figure 3, as the
comprehensive data for this group of incoming students is lacking; however, the data from
9
one of the main exchange programs Erasmus+ shows quite modest numbers (1100 students
in 2015-2017) (Alekseeva et. al, 2020).
Fig. 4. Share of international student in Russia by level and mode of study
35,00%
31,80%
30,00%
25,00%
20,00%
16,20%
15,00%
14,20%
8,70%
10,00%
5,00%
1%
2,60%
0,00%
Bachelor
Specialitet (5-year degrees)
Full-time
Part-time
Master
For the Bachelor degrees as well as Master’s, the most popular study programs include
Economics, Information technologies, Political science, and Language studies. For Spetialitet,
the most popular subjects are Clinical Medicine, Pharmacy, Information Security and Fine Arts
(Krasnova, 2021).
Statistics for the outbound mobility from Russia is relatively low compared to the number of
the incoming students: in 2020, only about 75,000 students went to study abroad. About 20%
of them chose China as a study destination, other popular destinations include Germany, Italy,
USA, Canada, France, Australia and the UK.
The main motivations of Russian students for studying abroad include quality of education in
certain specializations, overall academic reputation of foreign universities, professional
development opportunities, promising job market perspectives, and quality of life in the host
countries. While there is no data on the number of Russian students staying abroad after
graduation, many of them chose to study outside of Russia with the idea of staying abroad
(Minaeva, 2020a). However, the research (Minaeva, 2020a) shows that Russian graduates of
foreign universities consider returning to Russia if given the availability of career growth and
financial stability, which shows that Russia has the potential opportunity to address the brain
drain.
International student mobility in Russian regions
One of the distinctions of international student flows within Russia is the uneven distribution
of students by Russian region (Klyachko and Krasnova, 2004) (Fig. 5). The highest share of
students belongs to the metropolitan cities: Moscow and St-Petersburg.
10
Fig.5. Share of international students in Russian regions
In the past few years, this contrast between the regional and metropolitan areas became less
sharp (Table 1), mostly due to the active institutional initiatives of the Federal Universities,
National Research Universities across Russia, as well as medical universities which recruit a
significant share of international applicants (the share of international students studying
health studies in Russia is about 20%); nevertheless, the disproportion still remains
considerable.
Table 1. Top 10 Russian regions in terms of international student recruitment, 2017
Students from non-CIS countries
Region
Moscow
Saint Petersburg
Primorsky region
Kursky region
Tambov region
Tatarstan Republic
Belgorod region
Volgograd region
Voronezh region
Irkutsk region
Rostov region
Students from CIS countries
Share
students, %
22.6
12.1
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.2
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.3
of
Region
Share
students, %
20.3
Moscow
8.2
Saint Petersburg
6.5
Omsk region
Tomsk region
Tatarstan Republic
Novosibirsk region
Rostov region
Chelyabinsk region
Astrakhan region
Moscow
region
Moscow)
Samara region
of
5.0
4.1
3.7
3.5
2.8
2.4
(except
2.1
1.8
Source: Monitoring of Efficiency of Higher Education Institutions of the Russian Ministry of
Science and Education, 2018
Push and pull factors for Russia as a study destination
There are several pull-factors (Mazzarol & Soutar, 2002) which attract international students
to Russia (de Wit, Minaeva & Wang, 2021).
1. Tuition fee policies. About one third of international students (32% of students from
CIS countries and 28% from non-CIS countries) do not pay for their education (2020).
11
For self-financed international students, the average tuition fee varies from USD 3,500
at the bachelor level to USD 4,000 at the master level (Nefedova, 2020).
2. Language. For the Russian-speaking students from other countries, Russia is the most
attractive Russian-speaking study destination both in terms of the quality of education
and career perspectives (Nefedova, 2020). In addition, Russian institutions offer study
programs in English (though their number is rather limited), and Russian languages
pre-degree courses.
3. Quality of education. While the local universities do not have visibility in global
rankings, the reputation of the leading Russian institutions is one of the key pull-factors
for international students. In addition, the reputation of Russian education in specific
study fields (for example, medicine), provides Russia with a significant share of
students.
4. Attractive job market. This pull-factor is also more relevant for students from CIScountries. According to the immigration regulations, students from these countries do
not have to obtain a job visa to work in Russia after graduation (Zangieva &
Suleymanova, 2016). For non-CIS students, this factor is not as relevant as for this
group employment in Russia is associated with cultural and administrative barriers
(See Note 2).
5. Family connections with Russia and family advise. This factor is relevant both for postSoviet students and students from non-CIS countries (India, China, etc.). Study
experience of their parents.
6. Political and economic connections of Russia and students’ homes countries. This
relates mostly to students from China, who plan to be involved in Russian-Chinese
political and business projects, and see studying in Russia as an investment to their job
profile.
Challenges and barriers to international student mobility in Russia
The most significant factors that hinder student mobility to Russia include language barrier
and low number of English-taught programs (for students from non-CIS countries), low
visibility of Russian universities at the global education market, as well as lack of information
about Russia as a study destination, unclear and complex admission procedures (especially, at
the bachelor’s level), unclear labor market perspectives after graduation (this is particularly
relevant for students from non-CIS countries).
The main challenges from the national and university perspectives, that pre-exist to the
pandemic-specific challenges, featured in section D, include (de Wit et al., 2021):
1. Low diversification of products (lack of study programs designed specifically for the
international students as a target group, lack of international programs in IT and
engineering, low level of programs in cooperation with other universities, and skills
mismatches presented in Note 3 etc.).
12
2. Low diversification of markets. Following the Soviet model, Russia receives more than
half of its international students from CIS countries which creates several major
implications. First, it leads to underdeveloped export potential as other global regions
(for example, in Latin America) remain overlooked. Second, while formally CIS students
are considered to be international students, they study in Russian and they share a
very similar cultural background, therefore it cannot be considered as
internationalization in a comprehensive sense, and it doesn’t have much impact in
development of internationalization in Russian institutions.
3. Lack of coordination between different actors in education export. While there are
many actors involved in education export at different levels (Rossotrudnichestvo – at
the national level; universities – at the institutional level), their connections between
actors are not very developed. In addition, private actors (for example, industry and
business representatives) and regional governments are almost not involved in work
with international students.
4. Low level of internationalization in the Russian universities. According to the Soviet
model of internationalization, international students were expected to learn Russian
and get familiar with the Soviet academic culture. However, the current expectations
at the education market imply comprehensive internationalization on campus, which
implies social and academic adaptation of international students, but goes beyond that
and includes internationalized curriculum and study environment both for
international and domestic students, internationalization of research, availability of
programs in English, high English proficiency of the academic staff, expanded student
services for international students (such as psychological counselling, career
counselling etc.). While some high-ranked Russian institutions are relatively
internationalized, the higher education system at large remains difficult for adaptation
of international students.
B. Value of international student mobility
Scholars distinguish several main rationales for education export and student mobility (de Wit,
2015):
1. Economic rationales. This rationale includes gaining revenue directly from tuition
fees and from other types of income from international students (creation of new
jobs in the international education sector, student services, student housing, and
other spending). In countries with a pronounced focus on financial revenue from
student mobility, education export brings considerable financial contributions to
the national economy. For example, in 2019, the income from education export in
the USA reached 43 billion USD3, in Australia – 37,5 billion USD4, in the UK – 26
billion USD5.
3https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/03/magazine/one-of-americas-most-vital-exports-education-never-goes-abroad-but-
it-still-faces-threats.html
4 https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2019/11/australias-37-6b-international-studentexport-con/
5 https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20190131121139224
13
2. Political rationales. These motivations are usually related to what John Nye called
“soft power” – development of a positive image of the country, and it includes
popularization of national language and culture among international students,
increasing loyalty, building personal and professional connections in the country of
studies etc. This logic for student mobility was predominant for Russia during the
Cold war, however, during the past three decades the rationales became more
diversified.
3. Talent attraction. In conditions of raising competition for talent, international
education becomes one of the key tools for attracting talent to the country. This
rationale is further developed in Note 2 “Attract and retain international students:
a remedy to skill shortages”, under the international analysis on the economic
gains of opening labor market to international students.
4. Academic development, cooperation and internationalization of universities.
This rationale refers to the increase of the overall level of internationalization and
global cooperation at universities, their visibility at the global education landscape
and inclusion in the global education discourse. While not pronounced very
explicitly in the legislative documents, for Russia, this rational is crucial as it ensures
the quality and diversification of international education products, quality of
research and teaching, and other core elements of the university ecosystem. This
rationale includes various forms of cooperation (joint research, joint/double
degrees, short-term student and academic exchange, including virtual exchange;
internationalization of curriculum, and other initiatives which aim to boost global
cooperation).
It is important to mention that very few countries focus only on one rationale – in practice,
countries combine multiple rationales, emphasizing particular rationale according to the
strategic priorities and agenda of the national strategy. In Russia too, the motivations for
student mobility have changed over time. In the Soviet era, soft power was the main rationale,
which defined the methods in internationalization policy: tuition-free education, focus on
incoming students, student recruitment from specific countries (Kuraev, 2014). The current
student mobility policy pursues a different paradigm, aiming for a balanced set of goals for
internationalization. More attention is paid to academic development (which is supported by
various initiatives in research cooperation), talent attraction (policies include scholarships for
talented students, governmental quotas for tuition fee, etc.) and tuition revenue (which
results in development of English-taught programs by high-ranked institutions, and active
advertising of programs for self-paying students). That being said, the outcomes of
international student mobility are still insufficient in terms of finance, talent attraction, and
soft power which can be explained by unclear prioritizing of sub-goals within international
student mobility.
For example, in Russia, the potential for financial benefits from student mobility is still
underdeveloped due to the lack of competitive products and well-developed marketing
strategies. The economic value of international students is increasing (Zaschitinina & Pavlov,
2019); however, it remains quite modest compared to the revenue of other big players at the
14
market. For example, in 2018, income from educational services for international students at
Russian institutions was only RUB 13 billion (Monitoring of Efficiency of Higher Education
Institutions of the Russian Ministry of Science and Education, 2018).
C. National policy measures to trigger internationalization
A couple of projects have been implemented to boost student mobility and better position
Russian higher education institution on the global higher education landscape.
National and Federal projects
«5-100 university excellence project» is one of the key national education projects of the past
decade in Russia. It was launched in 2012 and completed in 2020. The project aimed to bring
Russian universities to the top positions in the global university rankings (Times Higher
education ranking, QS ranking, and ARWU). In addition, the goals of the project included an
increase of international students up to 15% in selected universities and increase of
international academic staff up to 10%. The project involved 21 universities in total. While the
project results are widely discussed both from Russian and international experts (Yudkevich
et al, 2017; Altbach, 2016; Sheregui & Arefiev, 2014), it had a positive effect on visibility of
Russian institutions, and on development of activities on international student recruitment.
Another Federal project - “Education export” was the first project in post-Soviet Russia which
is supporting a systematic effort to increase the number of international students. The project
was launched in 2017 (now it is modernized and some initiatives are included in other federal
projects); its target is to increase the number of international students up to 425,000 by 2024.
The main rationale behind the project is to reconsider the nature of education export in Russia
and to develop an up-to-date model of export addressing current global challenges (and not
only meeting numerical indicators), while at the same time developing new marketing
strategies, supporting extracurricular work with international students and graduates,
developing campus infrastructure, and ensuring a high quality of international programs. This
rationale is further developed in Note 3 “Attract and retain international students: a remedy
to skill shortages”.
The project aimed to support the organizational, legislative, and educational infrastructure to
attract international students. Its initiatives are divided into the following categories:





Direct marketing and recruitment
Popularization of Russian education (work with pupils, winter and summer schools,
scholarships)
Development of competitive international products for relevant target groups
(regions, countries, industries)
Development of university infrastructure
Immigration regulations
Upcoming initiatives in education export and internationalization
There are several national initiatives to be implemented in 2021 which include
internationalization component. For example, the project “Priority 2030” as a part of the
15
National project “University and Science” is focused to support several groups of Russian
universities aimed to foster national and regional development. The project provides vast
support for academic leadership and visibility at the global education market, however, the
goals for education export are not distinctively pronounced in this project.
At the national level, evaluation of the export strategy was based on meeting the KPI of the
Federal project “Education export”, yet, this kind of evaluation has a very formal nature. While
KPI indexes address the quantitative characteristics of internationalization (number of
international students, number of summer schools, number of development programs for
academic staff), the indexes do not allow to evaluate many important parameters as quality
of requirement, level of satisfaction among international students, level of student
engagement, and other qualitative characteristics that would be helpful for further
development of education export. In addition, for evaluation of student mobility and
internationalization activities, Russian universities use global rankings as a reference, due to
the fact that Russian education excellence initiatives imply the importance of visibility in
rankings. However, as implied by many scholars, the ranking measurements also focus more
on quantitative measurements (share of international student and staff, number of inbound
exchange students, number of international research collaborations, etc.), and the quality
measurements remain overlooked.
In addition, little national (or even regional) level research was done on adaptation and
experiences of international students in Russia – this research gap is slowly filling in (Nefedova,
2020; Beregovaya et al., 2019; Latipov, 2017), however, most of these works are based on
university-level data, and there is little opportunity to compare student experiences across
Russian regions.
Other actors in student mobility
One of the main challenges and reasons for underdeveloped potential of education export in
Russia is poor engagement of the regional government and industry. At the regional level,
there are very few initiatives that are aimed at support of student mobility and education
export, and the regional government plays a more administrative role (for example, help with
immigration issues and registration of international students). For example, practices like
scholarships from industry companies, internships for international students, and
international programs in cooperation with business are not a spread practice for Russian
internationalization. The Note 2 “Attract and retain international students: a remedy to skill
shortages”, will further explore that issue of interlinks between higher education and
employers.
At the institutional level, numerous Russian institutions are active in marketing and
recruitment and take a proactive role in development of education export strategy. For
example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, many universities were actively involved in
developing responses to possible decline in international enrollment (Minaeva, 2020b).
16
In the research work analyzing 173 Russian universities, Melikyan (2019) distinguishes several
types of institutions (university clusters) based on development of their internationalization
strategy: flagship universities (32 universities), leaders (18 universities), recruiters (6
universities), catching ups (46 universities) and outsiders (71 universities), as presented on the
right.
The most advanced activities for education export (mostly used by universities from flagship
and leader clusters) include:






Development of competitive English-taught programs,
Joint degree programs with foreign institutions,
Advanced marketing (including digital marketing) and analytics in student
recruitment,
Recruitment of international research staff,
Development of international competences in domestic academic staff,
Development of an advanced set of international initiatives for popularizing
university’s teaching and research profile (summer schools, international
conferences, MOOCs, etc.)
Flagship institutions (such as HSE, MGIMO University, MSU, SPbSU) lead both in international student numbers, and in
internationalization of programs, have a very strong academic profile and an internationalized learning environment.
The cluster of leaders includes institutions which receive high revenue from international tuition fees, and a developed
international environment, but with lower index than the flagship group. Recruiters (which include a big share in medical
universities) consider international recruitment as a strategic commercial activity, however, the study environment in
these universities is not as developed, as well as academic mobility. Catching up have low indexes for
internationalization activities, however, they do recruit international students and have a potential for developing a
comprehensive internationalization strategy. Finally, Outsiders are universities with the lowest internationalization and
student recruitment indexes, which need to put significant effort in order to be competitive players at the international
education market (Melikyan, 2019).
As a result, flagship and leading universities recruit more students from non-CIS countries,
and the quality of recruitment is higher. However, the number of these institutions is
comparatively low, and the most of Russian universities still need to advance their education
export products and strategy in order to contribute to the goals of the national strategy in
international student recruitment. It can therefore be recommended both to support the
expansion of leading universities and to improve others to reach the same level with measures
such as mentioned above.
D. Challenges and trends during the COVID-19 pandemics
During the pandemic, internationalization of education, and education export in particular,
was among the most affected areas in higher education worldwide. In Russia, the effect was
not as damaging as in some other countries (Australia, the USA, the UK), however, it revealed
considerable challenges both in work with the enrolled students, and in the strategy for
internationalization for 2020 and further.
17
In June 2020, HSE conducted a survey among the most internationalized universities in Russia
(70 institutions in total). The results of the survey reveal the following key changes and
challenges.
1. During the spring term of 2020, the most common difficulties in work with
international students were related to the organization of study process and
psychological support; while the majority of international students did not leave
Russia right away after the lockdown.
2. The concerns of the international offices were mostly related to recruitment of the
prospective students; 83% of respondents of the survey indicated that they expect the
decrease in international student enrolments. These expectations were mostly related
to the decrease of students from CIS countries, China and African states.
3. Anticipating the challenges for the autumn intake of 2020, the majority of institutions
have actively developed a set of online recruitment instruments.
4. Together with reconsidering the promotion strategies, institutions change their
internationalization strategy altogether, developing new products which could be a
better fit for expectations of the post-pandemic education market. University
representatives indicated that they plan development of online degree programs (19%
of the respondents); online programs in cooperation with other institutions (16%), and
online courses for international students (40%).
5. While institutions take up a proactive position in internationalization during the
pandemic, they do expect support at the national level. Among the most relevant
measures of university support, respondents indicate change in visa regulations for
international students, help in recruitment at the national level, methodological and
organizational support, and simplification of the admissions procedure.
Changes at the global market and implications for Russia

Changes in visa regulations
As the number of international students dropped dramatically, many countries introduce
more favorable visa regulations for international students. For example, in the UK,
international students are eligible now for a 2-year visa extension after graduation which will
allow them to explore the local job market. In the USA, visa regulations also improved for
students of STEM fields (Master and Ph.D. level).

Changes in recruitment policies
As all education activities, including marketing and promotion, were transferred to the online
mode during the pandemic, universities are becoming more elaborate in terms of
international student recruitment. Advanced instruments such as virtual campus tours, online
18
meetings with representatives of the faculty, one-on-one meetings with perspective students,
advanced SMM methods, became very popular in the past year. Many of these instruments
show high results as they allow to establish a closer connection with a perspective student.

Developing new study formats
While it is unclear, to what extent the online mode of delivery will remain a part of education
after the pandemic, in several upcoming years, it can be a valid response for mitigation of the
challenges caused by the pandemic. Institutions are actively introducing hybrid and online
programs. However, this is not the only change – many institutions deliver online summer and
winter schools, online preparatory training online as well as online micro-degrees, which is a
good strategic solution as it can further result in student enrollment at the full degree
program.
At the same time, universities encounter challenges - some of them are the results of the
pandemic, but others are the results of the overall dynamics at the global market:



Political turbulence. The unwelcoming discourse in such countries as USA and
Australia, Brexit in the UK, and nationalistic sentiments in other countries resulted in
reorientation of student flows from US and UK to East Asian region.
Safety issues. While the effects of the pandemic are decreasing, majority of countries
are still fighting the consequences of COVID-19, and in many cases it is unclear whether
students can start their studies on campus in 2021.
Travelling restrictions and visa restrictions. In many cases, obtaining a visa and
travelling to a study destination remains impossible. The research shows that while the
interest in online programs in high, international students still prefer on campus mode
to online teaching (StudyPortals, 2021).
Implications for Russia
The changes at the global education market (changes of student flows, international
education products, etc.) can bring valuable opportunities for Russia. While the negative
effects of the pandemic are quite tangible (constrains in university finance, difficulties for
physical mobility, etc.), the turbulence initiated some positive dynamics – for example,
increase in student recruitment activities at the institutional level, reconsideration of
marketing instruments, and interest in new form of mobility and international cooperation in
education in general. In addition, the changes at the global market and international student
flows expand potentially promising regional markets for Russia – particularly, South East Asia,
Latin America, Middle East and Africa.
At the same time, it is important to be practical about the focus of the post-pandemic strategy.
For example, at the market of the online full degrees Russia can be at the less advantageous
position compared to some European, Asian and North American countries, due to the lower
level of reputation of the programs. At the same time, the joint online degrees with strong
foreign partners can help Russian universities increase their visibility and universities’ profiles.
In addition, due to the fact that Russia coped with the pandemic much better than many other
countries, it can be a safer study destination in several upcoming years. However, while the
market presents opportunities for Russia, the quality of products and their smart targeting to
19
student groups and national goals remains the priority in order to transfer international
student numbers to the economic and academic results.
IV. International analysis
A. Internationalization and international student mobility worldwide: an overview of
trends
Trends in international student mobility are underlined by increasing demand and
diversification of destinations6. In 2017, there were about 5.3 million international students,
up from 2 million in 2000 and 4 million in 2015.7 The number is expected to reach 8 million by
2025 as predicted by the OECD report prior to the covid-19 crisis.8 Despite strong negative
effects in the short-term, the demand for international student mobility has been consistently
growing in the last 30 years. It is expected, then, to level the negative impacts of the pandemic
in the long run (please see below).
Country cases with growth and decrease of the international student number.
Profile of international students is determined by three main factors: the degree of study,
field of education and gender. The percentage of international9 and foreign students10
gradually increase with the degree of higher education. The field of study is a determinant
factor in the choice of studying abroad. The highest share of international students chooses
to study business, administration and law, followed by engineering, manufacturing and
construction across the OECD.
The differences in the concentration of student mobility are determined by various factors
such as historical reasons, better education capacity, rate of return or labor prospects at the
country of destination, perceived quality of education as well as non-economic factors such
as political instability, geographical proximity, cultural similarities or language.11
With an average of 4.5% growth per year, the number of international and foreign higher
education students grew rapidly between 1998 and 2018. English-speaking countries have
been the most attractive destinations for international students overall: The United States
6https://migrationdataportal.org/themes/international-
students#:~:text=the%20three%20definitions.-,Key%20Trends,Germany%20and%20the%20Russian%20Federation
7https://migrationdataportal.org/themes/internationalstudents#:~:text=the%20three%20definitions.-,Key%20Trends,Germany%20and%20the%20Russian%20Federation UNESCO
Institute for Statistics, December 2019
8 https://data.oecd.org/students/international-student-mobility.htm
9 International students: International students are those who left their country of origin and moved to another country for
the purpose of study. The country of origin of a tertiary student is defined according to the criterion of “country of upper
secondary education”, “country of prior education” or “country of usual residence”.
10 Foreign students: Foreign students are those who are not citizens of the country in which they are enrolled. Although they
are counted as internationally mobile, they may be long-term residents or even be born in the “host” country.
11 https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm/?refcode=20190209ig
20
accounts for 18% of the global education market, Australia and the United Kingdom for 8%
each and Germany for 6%.12
At the regional level:

Europe remains the first destination of internationally mobile students, with 2,4
million enrollments in 2018, where more than half of these students’ study in
Russia, France, United Kingdom and Germany.13 A considerable percentage of those
students go on mobility via Erasmus+ (22%) or are degree-mobile14 (11%). 86% of
European outgoing students chose to stay in the region, however, European outgoing
students constitute the second largest in the world after Asia-Oceania.15

Central Asia foresees relatively minor changes in student flows since the region
manages low levels of mobile students. Tajikistan attracts around 2,200 students,
mainly from Turkmenistan, India and Afghanistan, and sends 20,000 students to study
abroad, mainly to Russia. Kazakhstan has seen a significant increase in incoming
students, being the first country in Central Asia to be part of European Higher
Education Area through the Bologna Process. In 2019, it has received 40,000
students.16

East Asia’s student flow patterns indicate a shift from sender countries to receiver
ones. In 2015, Asian countries sent about 2.3 million degree seeking students abroad
and attracted 923.977 of them.17 In 2020, some universities have seen peak numbers
in terms of international students (National Taiwan Normal University 26% and
University of Hong Kong 43%).18Predictions made by Professor Simon Marginson, the
director of the Center for Global Higher Education, however, indicate that East Asia
will see increasing numbers of international students at the regional level (especially,
Japan, China, South Korea) with quicker recovery period from the covid-19.
In 2020, most countries were experiencing heavy drops in numbers of international
students.19 For instance, in the spring of 2020, Australia saw its international student numbers
dramatically drop and its critical supply of Chinese students all but disappear. Its firstsemester loss of an estimated 150,000 Chinese students will be followed by second-semester
declines, leading to across-the-board cost reductions and requests for emergency funding.
Universities UK, the body that represents British higher education, has indicated that, in the
coming academic year, British universities could face a £7 billion drop in income, representing
approximately one-third of all tuition fees from international students. Campus France
12 İdem.
13 https://ressources.campusfrance.org/publications/dynamiques_regionales/fr/dynreg_europe_fr.pdf
14 Degree-mobile students: Degree-mobile students are enrolled as regular students in any semester/term of a program
taught in the country of destination with the intention of graduating from it in the country of destination (distance learners
are not considered as mobile).
15 https://ressources.campusfrance.org/publications/dynamiques_regionales/fr/dynreg_europe_fr.pdf
16 https://emmasabzalieva.com/2020/10/30/whos-coming-whos-going-and-whos-staying-at-home-update-on-studentmobility-in-central-asia/
17 https://wenr.wes.org/2017/08/global-mobility-japan-malaysia-taiwan-and-south-korea-seek-to-shift-student-mobilityby-2025
18 https://www.statista.com/statistics/1091721/apac-leading-universities-by-international-student-share/
19 https://bized.aacsb.edu/articles/2020/june/covid-19-and-the-future-of-international-student-mobility
21
indicated that there has been a 26% decrease in visa applications compared to October 2019.20
The drop is also expected to be confronted to in Russia, and it is essential to follow closely
Chinese student intake, since they constitute the second largest share of international
students in the country.
New countries have gained increasing influence on global student mobility
Over the 2000-2012 period, the number of higher education students doubled from 100 to
196 million, and nearly half of the growth was in the four BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India
and China).21 Student mobility also follows this trend, with specifically China as the main
provider. Other key source markets include Malaysia, Vietnam and India.22 UK, US, Australia
and Canada together make up 40% of the imported students.23 Between 2018 and 2019, the
number of Chinese students studying abroad reached 710,000 with an increase rate of 8.3%24
In the OECD countries, students from Asia form the largest group of international and foreign
students in higher education in 2018 (57%), only China and India account for 30% of all mobile
students enrolled in the OECD countries.25
 China
The university reputation and ranking are the determinant factors for Chinese students’ choice
of destination in international mobility. In addition, Chinese employers tend to recruit
students returning from the US as it is perceived to provide more creative and critical
education.26 These findings underline the reasons why the UK and the US are conventionally
the top destinations for Chinese students.27However, with the impact of the pandemic,
among the pull and push factors (such as university reputation or lack of educational
capacities), health and safety became the primary concern of Mainland Chinese students.28
For instance, The British Council Report on Chinese student intentions indicates that 22% of a
total of 8,481 students who applied to study in the UK are likely or very likely to cancel their
plans due to the sanitary conditions.29
The expected stagnation and decline in Chinese students, “China reset”, might pose severe
challenges. The countries who host a high percentage of Chinese students, such as Russia,
would then be pressed to reinvest in the diversification of their student body and supporting
student success.30 Overall, a drop in the interest to study in English countries are observed for
20 https://access.ciup.fr/en/what-is-the-impact-of-covid-19-on-the-mobility-of-international-students-and-researchers/
21 https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/sites/strategie.gouv.fr/files/atoms/files/na_23-internationalisation-anglais-le_03-
02_10h_45_0.pdf
22 https://www.lek.com/sites/default/files/insights/pdf-attachments/Mapping-Global-Mobility-Trends-Education.pdf
23 https://www.lek.com/sites/default/files/insights/pdf-attachments/Mapping-Global-Mobility-Trends-Education.pdf
24 73% of the total students studying abroad are higher education students.
https://www.academia.edu/44652152/Impact_of_COVID_19_Pandemic_on_International_Higher_Education_and_Student
_Mobility_Student_Perspectives_from_Mainland_China_and_Hong_Kong
25 https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm/?refcode=20190209ig
26 http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2024313609_chinesehighschoolxml.html
27 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035520318243
28 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035520318243
29 https://www.britishcouncil.org/contact/press/higher-education-chinese-students-covid-report
30
https://www.internationalhighereducation.net/en/handbuch/gliederung/?articleID=2874#/Beitragsdetailansicht/809/2874
/The-%2522China-Reset%2522-for-International-Undergraduate-Enrollment
22
Chinese higher education students. Post-pandemic popular destinations are: US (17.1 %),
Hong Kong (13.35 %), the UK (12.18 %), Japan (10.77 %) and Taiwan (10.77 %).31
In order to create opportunities and to tap into the increasing demand for international
education in China, especially during and in the aftermath of the pandemic, key practices from
universities and governments should be considered:




Focusing on health recovery is key to attracting Chinese students.
Universities with higher number of Chinese students might need to diversify their
student body, as a result of declining number of outgoing students.
Increasing HEIs’ reputation via rankings, which is a determinant factor for Chinese
students’ choice of destination.
It is to note that China, as one of the leading source markets in student mobility, has
also become a large importer (in 2018, 490,000 students from 196 different countries,
with largest portion coming from East Asia).32
 India
India, as an exporter country, is growing faster than nearly any other outbound population
with about 15-20% average growth on a yearly basis since 2014 (the second largest group of
outbound students with about 400,000). India is typically a potential market, from which
Russian education system can increase the number of international students, currently
constituting only 15,151 of the total in 2020 (see Fig.2). Indian outgoing students are driven
by the perceived quality of education and/or desire to emigrate. The first group choses
generally top-ranked universities with academically acclaimed course curriculum. For those
students, the decision on the country of destination is not flexible, and these students are
harder to attract. The second group, typically having medium to low scores, prioritizes cost
over education and their decision is prone to be influenced by employment prospects at the
country of destination.33 It is to note that, for non-English speaking countries, it is hard to
attract Indian students, who have a preference due to common spoken language.
Internationally, universities and governments took action as per Indian students, such as:
● Making mobility costs’ affordable and providing labor prospects, determine
average Indian students’ decision to go on mobility. Therefore, such measures
would help the destination countries to attract a large majority of outgoing
students in India.
● Proposing English-speaking programs is key to attract Indian students to Russia.
New forms of internationalization are expanding, concurrently to student mobility
The internationalization of higher education does not only consist of international student
mobility, but is expanded via involvement of programs and higher education institutions
cross borders, of curriculum and pedagogical tools as well as of international research
31 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035520318243
32 https://www.statista.com/statistics/430717/china-foreign-students-by-country-of-origin/
33 https://www.lek.com/sites/default/files/insights/pdf-attachments/Mapping-Global-Mobility-Trends-Education.pdf
23
collaborations.34 It cannot be only focused on specific disciplines or students, but should be
undertaken in a comprehensive way; integrating policies, programs, initiatives, and
individuals. New forms of internationalization mainly aim to bring Internationalization at
Home (IaH), by incorporating intercultural and international aspects of the curriculum,
teaching research and extra-curricular activities.35 Transnational education delivered through
off-shore campuses, joint programs or distance learning are the fast-growing examples.36
Internationalization has also other forms, where it is more integrated in the HEIs objectives
and actions via Higher Education Networks (HEN). HENs can create common action to trigger
local development at the host countries by facilitating student exchange, increasing the
international outreach of universities as well as making it easier to obtain funding from
external sources. Examples such as the creation of European Higher Education Area (EHEA)
aim at harmonizing higher education in areas such as mobility or employability. Universities
and governments took action to boost IaH, mostly through partnerships.
Global challenges and barriers to international student mobility
The most common challenges on international mobility are grouped as following, and many
are common for Russian higher education institutions. There are numerous commonalities
with the challenges identified in the background analysis on Russia.
 Lack of funding
At the institutional level, funding is crucial for internationalization of higher education, and
needs to be in line with the long-term national strategies.37 In most of the countries the
international students pay higher tuition fees than the domestic students at publicly-funded
institutions. These might reflect the full cost of programs (US and UK) or lower with a public
funding support (most of the EU countries) (Hauptman, 2015). In the case where the majority
of higher education institutions rely on full cost programs, student mobility is less likely to
sustainably contribute to education systems’ funding, as also can be seen in the revenue loss
of HEIs in the UK, US or Australia (see part III.A.). Considering these challenges, it is
recommended that a minimum number of universities charge low tuition fees for
international students, which not only makes Russia Higher Education system particularly
attractive for talented students with low-income, but also renders its financial structure more
resilient to crisis.
From individuals’ point of view, the extra costs implied on international students, if not
supported with student aid programs, might hinder the mobility of the most talented
students, thus hindering the development of the host country.38 Other additional costs might
include applications including visas and residence permits, cost of living, accommodation and
so on. Furthermore, some countries require students to have a certain amount of money to
be eligible for obtaining a residence permit.39 Providing scholarships, or applying exemptions
34 https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/sites/strategie.gouv.fr/files/atoms/files/na_23-internationalisation-anglais-le_03-
02_10h_45_0.pdf
35 http://www.oecd.org/education/imhe/Approaches%20to%20internationalisation%20-%20final%20-%20web.pdf
36 http://www.oecd.org/education/imhe/Approaches%20to%20internationalisation%20-%20final%20-%20web.pdf
37 http://www.oecd.org/education/imhe/Approaches%20to%20internationalisation%20-%20final%20-%20web.pdf
38 https://nvvn.nl/migration-and-education-international-student-mobility/
39 https://nvvn.nl/migration-and-education-international-student-mobility/
24
from financial proofs needed for residence permits, would facilitate the mobility of those
students.
In terms of preparedness and admissions, simpler procedures are required to facilitate the
international student flow. Even though diverse bilateral or multilateral agreements exist
between the institutions of the inbound and outbound students, most are often left alone in
seeking funding or in preparing due to complex national administrative systems that are very
diverse, even in well-established and harmonized EHEA.40
 Cultural barriers/differences and student preparedness
International students are often faced with the issues of integration and adjustment upon
their arrival to the host country, and they are often exacerbated by language barriers, cultural
shock or even discrimination.41 For instance, Asian students and residents experiencing
discrimination or even assaults when wearing face masks, could impact their decision on the
choice of the destination country.42 Considering the fact that primarily China as well as other
South East Asian countries constitute a large share of international students in Russia (see
part II.A), these considerations are primordial to attract and retain those students.
Furthermore, overcoming language barriers would unlock the potential of the increased
student intake, considering that students who take pre-sessional Russian language courses
constitute already 8,5% of students in 2018 (see part II.A). Cultural barriers or differences
may be overcome by not only preparing incoming students but also preparing a welcoming
environment at the host institution (Bryla & Ciabiada, 2014)
Best practices show that it is essential to:
 Complete the programs with cultural preparation workshops prior to the arrival of
students as well as accompany them along their studies.
 Ensure that the information regarding these offers is not only accessible but also
supported with appropriate promotion tools
.
 Recognition issues, credit transfer
The systems in place concerning the recognition of skills, qualifications and competences are
rarely harmonized, except in the European higher education area (EHEA) that developed
common degree standards, quality assurance and qualification recognition mechanism and
academic mobility exchange (e.g., European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System [ECTS],
Diploma supplement). Out of the EHEA, only less than one quarter of migrants are globally
covered by bilateral recognition agreement.43 Russia being part of the Bologna process enjoys
facilitated mobility with higher education institutions in EHEA. Furthermore, Russia is a
member of BRICS Network University, for which mutual recognition of qualifications is
currently under discussion.44 Finally, Russia has intergovernmental agreements on mutual
recognition of education documents with all countries of the Commonwealth of Independent
40 Challenges of Student Mobility in a Cosmopolitan Europe | SpringerLink
41 https://nvvn.nl/migration-and-education-international-student-mobility/
42 https://www.researchcghe.org/perch/resources/publications/wp54to-publish.pdf
43 UNESCO GEM Report 2019 https://gem-report-2019.unesco.org/chapter/introduction/mobility-of-students-and-
professionals/
44 http://nu-brics.ru/news/16/
25
States.45 The issues regarding assessment of skills are addressed with more detail in Note 3
“Prepare Higher Education in Russia to future skills needs”.
 Foreign language skills
Lack of foreign language skills is listed as one of the main barriers to student mobility, as shown
in Russia (Klahr & Ratti, 2000). With one in four people using English worldwide, Englishspeaking countries constitute the most popular destinations (e.g., 40% of internationally
mobile students in the OECD and partner countries are enrolled in 4 countries).46 Thus, English
language competences become relatively more determinant, whereas the requirement to
study in a language other than English, impose only a less significant barrier (Klahr & Ratti,
2000). In a study conducted by the Erasmus Program, it is found that the students who chose
not to participate are much more likely to have lower confidence in their foreign language
skills (Souto-Otero et al. (2013).
Good practice shows that early intervention in language learning should be supported, or
accompanying language programs should be integrated prior to and during the study
programs.
B. Value of international student mobility
International student mobility contributes to financial and academic aspirations of the host
country.
International students contribute to countries’ economies’ not only via their spending in the
host country but also via development of skills level in the workforce (both for destination and
sending country). They also improve the quality of education, by helping universities gain
reputation, and by improving the scientific environment and innovation within the university
thanks to the diversification of student profiles. Previous section on the background analysis
highlighted that the quality of education provided to international students is asset for Russian
institutions.
Financial benefits contribute to the local development of countries. This is particularly
important for Russia, whose potential remains still untapped with only about USD 1.6 billion
yearly income from education services (see part II.B). Financial benefits include:
 generation of revenues via tuition fees, to help fund HEIs, preferably with low tuition
fees at scale, in other terms, by increasing the number of students, in order to maintain
the attractiveness of HEIs.
 generation of revenues via day-to-day expenses incurred by international students. A
2018 study conducted by London Economics, shows that, holding for all the costs
incurred by an international student (social security, financial support and so on…),
every non-EU student contributes with an estimated £1 million to the UK economy.47
For the Netherlands, the net added value of international students to Dutch economy
45 https://studyinrussia.ru/en/actual/articles/recognition-of-russian-and-international-degrees-advice-for-non-resident-
applicants/
46 https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm/?refcode=20190209ig
47 https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Economic-benefits-of-international-students-by-constituencyFinal-11-01-2018.pdf
26

is estimated as high as €500 million per year.48 Low tuition fees contribute to Russian
institutions’ attractiveness and financial resilience, however, in order to ensure that
HEIs generate sufficient funds, it is essential for Russia to focus on increasing revenues
from international students’ day to day expenses. That translates into putting forward
a strategy to increase the demand (i.e., student intake) with low tuitions fees, where
greater volume of students brings higher day-to-day spending at the host country.
Thanks to student mobility, there is an increase in the number of skilled workers with
a greater potential to innovate, which make them valuable assets for countries’
development.
Non-financial benefits of student mobility help students respond to labor market demands,
contribute to countries’ innovation capacities and help improve the quality of education.
These benefits are discussed in the Note 2 “Attract and retain international students: a remedy
to skill shortages”.


International students improve their multicultural and cognitive skills with a
boomerang effect on domestic ones: For instance, studies indicate that when the
academic content and pedagogical delivery is offered in a synergic fashion, study
abroad nurtures global citizenry by raising cultural diversity, and tolerance as well as
awareness on radical nationalism (Tarrant et al, 2014).
Lastly, student mobility enhances quality of education with diversified courses and
pathways available.49 For instance, improved foreign language proficiency and variety
of courses lead to better employment outcomes both in home countries and abroad.50
The value of internationalization is questioned: International mobility should be a means,
not an end to contribute to individual and socioeconomic development
With the massification of internationalization, it has become ever more essential to ensure
the effectiveness of student mobility programs in attaining its founding goals, which are to
enhance research, quality of education, employability and career of students51. To understand
internationalization’s positive impact, it is not sufficient to look at only inputs (e.g., number of
exchange agreements) or outputs (e.g., percentage of outgoing students).52The inclusion of
internationalization indicators in university ranking systems (e.g., U multi-rank in Europe, THE
ranking…) contributed to the phenomenon, where it has become more important to improve
inputs or outputs for marketing purposes, rather than looking at impact. Hence, not all forms
of internationalization are by definition good, unless they improve the quality of education
and research as an instrument.53 Initiatives such as 5-100 university excellence project (see
part II.C), should take into consideration this aspect in striving to develop universities’
reputation in Russia. Furthermore, to ensure that the internationalization processes
effectively contribute to its objectives, universities and governments might look at
strengthening quality assurance (QA), both at institutional level (i.e., self-evaluation of
48 https://www.wittenborg.eu/new-report-value-international-students-netherlands-economy.htm
49 https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/sites/strategie.gouv.fr/files/atoms/files/na_23-internationalisation-anglais-le_03-
02_10h_45_0.pdf
50 https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20190204144538245
51 https://www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/internationalisation-not-end-itself
52 https://www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/internationalisation-not-end-itself
53 https://www.academia.edu/34759425/The_End_of_Internationalization
27
strength and weaknesses of the university) and external level (i.e., evaluation by an external
body such as an accreditation agency). Experience and research show how QA helps build
trust, relevance, and compatibility at international level by providing accountability, and help
support mobility activities and attractiveness of the university via performance indicators
such as membership in international organizations and associations or participation in
international scientific programs and grants. As the fundamental responsibility for quality
rests within the HEIs, internal QA and, the development of a quality culture helps HEIs tackle
issues related to their operational autonomy.54 External QA, affirms the accountability of the
institutions by the public, thus focuses on study programs and on institutions themselves. 55
Replacing higher education on the spectrum between being a public good and providing a
tradable service on the international market, is essential in designing programs that are of
added value for its beneficiaries.56 To balance the two ends, host institutions should adopt a
code of ethics targeted at international students, who are assumed to need more protection,
considering the cultural behavior differences, language barriers or complex administrative
procedures. For instance, Germany has a code of conduct on how to treat foreign students in
German universities with content on the rights of international students. Greece established
an ethics committee, set by the representatives from important stakeholders in the university.
C. National policy measure meant to trigger internationalization: a global outlook
Strategies on internationalization cover areas which target a wide array of goals from funding
to facilitating access. They include securing funding via student expenditures and fees,
providing access to students with disadvantaged backgrounds (e.g., reducing costs of tuition
fees, providing hybrids forms of internationalization such as IaH), providing enabling
environments at HEIs (e.g., offering preparatory language, culture programs, extracurricular
activities), facilitating access to programs (e.g., simplified visa procedures, recognition of
credits) and expanding HEIs’ outreach by enhancing cooperation (e.g., via Higher Education
Networks) and so on.
To navigate among various policies and strategies, one can look at two main determinants:
incentives and cooperation, resonating with the push and pull factors presented in the
previous section on the Russian background. Incentives can be categorized into 1) incentives
targeted on individuals, 2) for improving the learning environment and international programs
as well as 3) university-specific incentives (World Bank, 2019).
Incentives targeting individuals

The type of incentive-based strategy targeted on individuals relies on the
optimization of value for fees and qualifications received. Those incentives might
include grants, scholarships and fee waiving (e.g., South Africa applying the same
tuition fee to students from South African Development Community [SADC]
countries), credit transfer and recognition of qualifications to reduce barriers to
54 http://ehea.info/pid34433/quality-assurance.html
55 http://ehea.info/pid34433/quality-assurance.html
56 http://www.oecd.org/education/imhe/Approaches%20to%20internationalisation%20-%20final%20-%20web.pdf
28
mobility (e.g., SHARE project in ASEAN aiming to create a Credit Transfer System in
the region).

In terms of tuition fees, various models exist, where for some countries international
students pay higher fees and for others, the fees are reduced or eliminated. Even
though some argue that increased fees have many advantages (see part III.C.), it is
important to ensure that they do not create barriers for the migration of highly skilled
workers.57 For instance, students from the European Economic Area can study in any
other country within this area, paying the same tuition fees as national students.
Incentives targeting teaching, learning, research and employability by both governments
and HEIs

The government incentives for improving the learning environment and
international programs include, migration and visa policy (see Note 2 “Attract and
retain international students: a remedy to skill shortages”), employment/research
opportunities for international students during mobility, career opportunities for
foreign nationals or boosting international partnerships. Even though not directly
related to education, incentives such as migration and visa policies, might facilitate
learning environment by easing access to the employment market with schemes such
as sandwich courses rotating between school programs and training in the job market.

Incentives initiated by universities might also be effective in attracting students. For
instance, offering English-taught programs and internationalizing curriculums, creating
joint-dual degree programs and developing support offices for international students
on the issues ranging from information on courses to medical insurance.

National policies and strategies contribute also to attracting students via specific
incentives for universities. For instance, they may provide conditional funding based
on the performance indicators which include the student mobility. In Finland, inflows
of international students are taken into account in university funding formulas. In
Estonia and Norway, the indicator is used whether or not to block grant funding
allocated to tertiary institutions. Those policies might help incentivize and trigger
internationalization. Nevertheless, it is important to account for disadvantages for less
internationalized institutions, which would face lower levels of funding, impacting
negatively future investments in the student mobility. Hence, there should be
differentiated national policies and approaches tailored to each institution.
Cooperation and partnerships to increase the attractiveness of HEIs
Cooperation is essential in internationalization of higher education, not only to increase the
attractiveness of HEIs via greater visibility and outreach, particularly relevant to the Russian
context (see part II) but also by providing for a space on sharing and improving practices. For
instance, national HE networks often produce a list of indicators that help measure the
effectiveness of internationalization. Regional networks help facilitate the recognition of
57 https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm/?refcode=20190209ig
29
credits (e.g., SHARE Project) or to promote national incentives targeted at students abroad
(e.g., Africa-China Forum, where China promotes its scholarship programs). Institutional
networks help improve best practices and facilitate joint action among universities. For
instance, The International Association of Universities (IAU)’ activities include e.g., peer to
peer learning, advisory services, knowledge sharing events.
Retaining students
Finally, when analyzing strategies to unlock the potential of internationalization, one should
not only look at attracting international students but also attracting “back” the outgoing
students. National strategies to trigger brain circulation can be key to render the sending
country more attractive. For instance, Thailand has been implanting the “Reverse Brain Drain
Project”, where the Thai diaspora is promoted to return for professional positions in Thailand
(See Note 2 ““Attract and retain international students: a remedy to skill shortages”).58
Chinese government has also been successfully implementing policies to reverse brain drain:
between 2012 and 2016 the rate of returned students increased by 36.26%. 59 The national
strategy focuses on reinforcing partnerships between universities and companies to increase
attractiveness of employability opportunities. The practices include sending Chinese recruiters
to targeted foreign universities; and financial incentives such as free housing
provided to
potential employees. It is to note that even though outbound student numbers are rather low
in Russia (50,000 in 2018), the financial stability and availability of career growth puts Russia
at an advantage in addressing the potential brain drain via schemes such as mentioned above
(see part II.A).
D. Global challenges and trends during the COVID-19 pandemics
The impact of COVID-19 on trends in higher education
As seen in the section on the Russian background analysis, the crisis has negatively impacted
student flows in mobility: worsened safety and legal status in the host country, discontinuity
of learning and the delivery of course material, negative student perception on the value of
their degree.60 In 2020, higher education institutions around the world closed down to
control the spread of the pandemic potentially affecting more than 3.9 million international
and foreign students studying in OECD countries61 International student mobility growth is,
nevertheless, expected to remain strong in the coming years, due to 1) a record number of
students entering the higher education age brackets, and those are being the most interested
in mobility, 2) favorable institutional environment at its peak for international mobility, with
national education systems that are ever more comparable and compatible and that integrate
credit systems along with national action plans to stimulate mobility.62
Several challenges are expected to redefine the higher education landscape, some of whom
are strongly resonating with the Russia-specific challenges as previously analyzed:
58 https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20170321102746248
59 https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20180308174428919
60 https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/974729f4-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/974729f4-en#boxsection-
d1e17892
61 https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse
62 https://bized.aacsb.edu/articles/2020/june/covid-19-and-the-future-of-international-studentmobility#:~:text=Over%20the%20last%20two%20decades,to%208%20million%20by%202025.
30

Quality of education might be hindered when teachers are unprepared to use online
tools.63 Furthermore, financial value of online teaching services has been questioned
by many students, who claim that online teaching should implicate a cut in tuition fees
since there is a drop in quality in comparison to face-to-face teaching.64 This might
trigger a drop in enrollments.

Global inequalities have also been further reinforced due to decreased funding
received by less renowned universities, affecting the most, low-income countries or
regions. Private universities in those countries are particularly affected, due to the
fragility of their financial structure, which is majorly based on tuition-fees. On the other
hand, public institutions are not under protection, with public funding expected to be
shrunk as a result of heavy expenditure on emergency aids and health sectors.65
Contrastingly, constraints imposed by covid-19 might also give way to opportunities in
improving current practices and policies in higher education, that Russia could explore to
optimize the opportunities presented earlier:

Due to the pandemic, health and legal status of students in the host country will affect
even more the choice of destination for international mobility. To attract students,
governments could simplify procedures regarding the legal status of international
students and provide better conditions for non-resident visa status (student visas).

Online teaching might as well be used to attract more international students, with long
term effects on local development:
by helping proliferate hybrid models,
partnerships among universities, and pathways between online classes and face-toface teaching.66 These offers help reduce the cost of studies and open gateways to
poorer populations in entering top universities. Lastly, outreach in student
recruitment might be enlarged due to improved use of digital technologies, allowing
universities with low funding to reach newer students.
The recovery from the pandemic is expected to become a strong determinant in the choice of
destination country for international students.67 Easing the visa procedures and provision of
financial support remain among the most effective in attracting international students.
Up against the current health crisis, it is crucial to revive enrolled students’ interest and their
perception on the value of education. For instance, the US has taken the decision not to
extend visas for students enrolled in universities switching to online teaching due to the
sanitary crisis.68 The policy might affect the drop in the number of international students, who
perceive a sharp decrease in the value of the study programs that are offered. On the other
hand, other countries have offered leniency around the visa rules, allowing students to
63 https://www.internationalhighereducation.net/api-
v1/article/!/action/getPdfOfArticle/articleID/2915/productID/29/filename/article-id-2915.pdf
64 https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20210129102208673
65 https://www.internationalhighereducation.net/apiv1/article/!/action/getPdfOfArticle/articleID/2915/productID/29/filename/article-id-2915.pdf
66 https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20201202134456579
67 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883035520318243
68 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53320336
31
remain on campus (Canada, the United Kingdom).69 (See the Note 2 “Attract and retain
international students: a remedy to skill shortages”).
New funding measures have been made available at the EU level70: Some loan-based support
managed by the European Investment Bank (EIB) Group is also available to higher education
institutions, to upgrade their facilities through the European Fund for Strategic Investments
(EFSI) and participate in innovative funding programs, such as Erasmus+ master degree loans
for international students.
Some states decided top fund national aid packages. For instance, the CARES Act Higher
Education Emergency Relief Fund of the United States71: It provides funding to institutions and
students. The crisis has affected the continuity of learning and the delivery of course material,
the safety and legal status provide emergency financial aid grants to students whose lives have
been disrupted.
Online courses or distance learning are chosen as a substitute to face-to-face learning in the
current context to ensure the pedagogical continuity. However, only few students consider it
as a sole alternative to in-person learning.72 Furthermore, those modules do not provide for
international exposure, access to foreign job markets or networking opportunities that exist
in the traditional student mobility.73
69 https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm/?refcode=20190209ig
70 https://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/higher-education/effective-and-efficient-higher-education_en
71 https://www.oecd.org/education/the-impact-of-covid-19-on-education-insights-education-at-a-glance-2020.pdf
72 In the United States, only 13% of first-cycle tertiary students were exclusively enrolled in distance education courses in
2017. https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm/?refcode=20190209ig
73 https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm/?refcode=20190209ig
32
V. Recommendations
While there is a set of pronounced policies and a practical effort for international student
recruitment in Russia, a number of strategic adjustments is needed to succeed at the
competitive global market. International student recruitment is a complex phenomenon, and
it is important to emphasize that it takes time to build capacity for efficient student
recruitment. Some of most serious barriers (such as language barrier and low level of
internationalization at Russian universities) cannot be eliminated overnight. However, a
comprehensive strategy tied to specific goals of student recruitment can significantly reduce
the negative effects of the barriers (Table 2).
Table 2. Main barriers of international student recruitment in Russia
Goal
Increasing capacity of Russia as a
study destination
Financial revenue
Talent Attraction
Soft power
Barriers
1.Language barrier
2.Low level of internationalization of universities
3.Poor coordination between various actors
1.Lack of competitive programs
2.Low diversification of products
3.Lack of marketing research and data
1.Lack of transition mechanisms to the job market at universities
2.Low level of engagement for key actors (industry, regional government)
1.Limited student community engagement
2. Low number products that target this goal (cultural exchange programs etc.)
The development of this strategy should take into account the following recommendations.
Their implementation will require programming and sequencing as well as financial resources
from the Russian authorities.
1. Define the priority goals of student mobility, and align a set of initiatives for each
strategic goal.
This recommendation calls for a more tailored set of initiatives in order to achieve the
target KPI for each strategic goal. Different groups of international students look for
different pull-factors when choosing a country, and instruments for talents attraction and
gaining tuition revenue will differ significantly. For example, scholarships and financial
support will be a feasible instrument for the first goal, but not relevant for the latter one.
In addition, the format of education products the geography of recruitment and other
essential elements of the strategies for each goal will vary as well.
In order to diversify the set of initiative it is crucial to understand the market supply and
demand in detail, which calls for a thorough marketing analysis with a focus on qualitative
research.
2. Conduct a marketing analysis of priority education markets by geography and resource
potential. Statement of these priority markets should be included in the national
internationalization in higher education policy.
Ability to diversity and target different student groups helps sustain international student
recruitment at HEIs, which becomes more resilient in terms of maintaining their international
33
student flows specifically in times of crisis (e.g., Covid-19). It allows to diversify the
international students’ profile in HEIs by:



attracting students from high demand countries (esp. India and South East Asia, etc.),
attracting students from post-Soviet countries (these markets also remain a priority
for the Russian Federation, but competition is growing)
attracting students to elite expensive programs from non-CIS countries.
In addition, analytics could help identify the priority study specializations and study formats
for specific markets, tackle the barriers for international student mobility and improve the
experiences of international students in Russia.
The recommendation aims at also increasing financial revenue coming from higher education
by compensating for the lack of marketing research and data in the country. International
experience shows that such practices are utilized by the most prominent universities. For
instance, McGill University in Canada, constitutes a working group, which is in charge of
mapping out the HEI’s global presence, and of developing a marketing research capacity so as
to adopt the educational programs to the existing demand.74
3. Ensure the expansion of the set of educational export-oriented products considering the
analysis of priority markets, for example:






support for the elaboration of internationally competitive educational programs based
on scientific schools of universities that are included in the top global academic subject
rankings;
increase attractiveness of master degree programs for international students (such
programs are often more flexible and cheaper for international students);
support the offer of short-term programs;
expansion of joint programs with leading foreign universities (which will allow using
their potential and brand to attract international students);
creating flagship English-taught programs for international students in cooperation
with leading Russian companies;
creating programs in specific study fields high in demand (for example, oil and gas
management, IT).
The creation of such export-oriented products helps remedy Russian universities’ low levels
of internationalization, increase their competitiveness as well as help the creation of products
that reinforce Russian soft power. For instance, designing and developing smaller and adapted
programs targeted at poorer students and countries are among the goals of renowned
universities such as MIT in the US. 75
In addition, diversification of education products can help focus on different national goals of
education export: soft power, financial revenue and talent attraction. With this in mind, the
74 https://www.mcgill.ca/international/strategic-framework
75 http://web.mit.edu/globalstrategy/A_Global_Strategy_For_MIT_May2017.pdf
34
products can be designed for different groups, which will make it easier to evaluate and
improve their effectiveness.
4. Expand the representation of Russian universities in the market of the online programs
The opportunity to develop a new niche of full online education (micro-degrees, professional
certificates, etc.) in relatively equal conditions with competing countries. At the same time,
the advantages of Russian universities may be the relatively lower cost of the product. Such
an initiative may involve an allocation of grants from the government for the development of
online products by universities. It is also feasible to support hybrid programs, which integrate
both face-to-face teaching and online courses, help improve the outreach in student
recruitment by reducing fees and opening gateways to poorer populations. The duality of the
programs allows for expanding the student profiles while maintaining the core benefits of
internationalization.
The increase in outreach both in recruitment processes and enrollments of students can help
Russian higher education overcome challenges such as low competitiveness of universities
and of their soft power abroad. The diversification of student profiles with the inclusion of
online programs helps also improve the low levels of internationalization at targeted
universities. Successful in such schemes, McGill University in Canada, includes in its goals
expanding online degree programs to reach out new and non-traditional audiences. 76
5. Supporting convenient services for international students is critically important for the
attractiveness of Russian universities
With the exception of very few top universities, Russian universities do not have a very
developed internationalization agenda. It is essential that universities take a proactive
position in developing the environment for high-quality international student experiences
which includes:









development of English proficiency among Russian faculty
development of an internationalized study and living environment on campus
high-quality administrative services for international students
exchange of international education practices
assistance with development of the internationalized curriculum
methodological support for teaching for international students
provide clear guidance to students about admission procedures
support mechanisms in immigration procedures for students who enter Russian job
market after graduation
mechanisms of work with alumni and active social engagement of international
students during their studies
Language is a main barrier for non-CIS high demand countries’ students to study in Russia.
Improving English language proficiency of faculty members not only helps attract students
with English taught program but also increases the profile of Russian universities at the
76 https://www.mcgill.ca/international/strategic-framework
35
international level. In addition, providing assistance in immigration procedures ensure a
smoother transition to the job market, which still needs to be consolidated to improve entry
into the labor market in the Russian context. Leading universities in the world provide for such
services to international students. For instance, Sciences Po Paris, in France, supports
international students with dedicated services on immigration not only before and during the
studies but also after their graduation. Furthermore, various courses are offered both in
English and French language by faculty members. 77
6. Provide an enabling environment to attract students with different cultural and language
backgrounds
Cultural preparation programs and well-rounded communication about the availability of
those to prospect students, increase the student intake from regions that are not culturally
close to the host country. Expanding the courses of Russian as a foreign language and
humanitarian courses can help with this. When well promoted, these activities will increase
the visibility and the recognition of Russian HEIs as international institutions well connected
to globalized knowledge society and will furthermore allow for a more diverse student body
enrolling at Russian HEIs.
Limited student community engagement is one of the barriers to increase the Russian soft
power abroad. Those schemes helping provide for a more enabling environment would help
students to engage more with each other and create a feeling of belonging, which in return
helps them become “ambassadors” of the Russian culture and of higher education outside the
country. International practices point to the importance of the issue. For instance, in
Singapore, NUS provides its international students various welcome events with a specific
organization working on the issue (NUS iCARE) and prepares welcome kits including various
information to connect international students with local students and to help them be
culturally immersed throughout the program. 78
7. Provide support for monitoring and data collection for internationalization and student
mobility.
Currently, international student recruitment in Russia is very understudied. While there is a
lot of general data on push and pull factors and number of international students, there is no
detailed understanding of the international student population (background and motivations
and study profiles of students from specific countries, plans after graduation, regional
statistics, employment statistics, and other detailed information). It is crucial to collect and
analyze this data in order to develop more accurate and evidence-based initiatives and make
informed decisions both on the national and regional levels. A good understanding of
dynamics of international mobility on the national and regional scale, it is crucial to launch
monitoring initiatives of the national level.
The collection of such data would help study various barriers to international mobility in Russia
to create relevant solutions, including the lack of transition mechanisms to job market, lack of
diversification of products and relevant demand, limited student community engagement and
so on. Such mechanisms are extensively utilized in leading countries in terms of
77 https://www.sciencespo.fr/students/en/living/your-residence-permit.html
78 https://nus.edu.sg/osa/student-life/international-students/welcome-events
36
internationalization of education. For instance, the OECD provides for regular comprehensive
reports and statistics on student profiles across the member countries.
8. Stronger involvement of the national agency for internationalization
National agencies for internationalization carry out a wide range of important tasks: they are
involved in promotional activities, help with student recruitment, data collection and creation
of a positive reputation of the national education. In some countries, the promotion of
education and establishing connections with prospective students via national agencies is
underexplored. In addition, better cooperation between national agencies and domestic
universities is important for successful promotion of national education.
Increased involvement of national agency in data collection would allow for understanding
the education to job market transition so as to consolidate the mechanisms, that are currently
underdeveloped in Russia. Furthermore, from an organizational point of view, this help
identify issues concerning poor coordination and low level of engagement between actors in
the sector, and thus helps plan national measures to improve actors’ involvement mechanisms
in increasing internationalization of universities. Leading countries in internationalization of
education, utilize dedicated national organizations. For instance, in Japan, JASSO (Japan
Student Services Association), not only conducts surveys on motivations among international
students but also on support provided by universities and student satisfaction79.
9. International experience shows that the educational environment is important for
attracting foreign students.
Therefore, Russian universities should be attractive to the world's leading scientists, as well as
have a global level infrastructure:


9a Development of infrastructure and campuses that can be attractive at the global
level for applicants (with the attraction of private investments at public-private
partnership)
9b Support the recruitment of foreign leading professors. One of the important factors
attracting foreign students is the presence of recognized foreign faculty in Russian
universities. This can be considered a special program of co-financing of their salaries
by 50% directly from the federal budget and 50% by universities - this practice was
successfully used by China. International experience shows that measures targeted at
employing foreign professors help meet universities’ teaching needs and attract new
knowledge and expertise. For instance, for this purpose, Canadian government helps
develop special hiring criteria for foreign professors in cooperation with Employment
and Social Development Canada (ESDC)/Service Canada and Immigration, Refugees
and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) as well as with universities, degree-granting colleges,
and unions representing Canadian academics.80
Low levels of internationalization in Russian higher education are an impediment to increase
capacity of Russia as a study destination. The abovementioned factors are in that sense of
79 https://www.jasso.go.jp/en/about/organization/publication/index.html
80 https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/foreign-workers/academic.html
37
utmost importance for Russian higher education policies to help attract foreign students and
ensure that universities have a more international profile.
38
Annex: definition81

Internationally mobile student (UNESCO, OECD): An internationally mobile student is
one who crosses a border for the purpose of pursuing his or her studies and is enrolled
in an educational program outside his or her country of origin. Only students enrolled
in a program leading to a degree are counted.

Foreign students: Foreign students are those who are not citizens of the country in
which they are enrolled. Although they are counted as internationally mobile, they
may be long-term residents or even be born in the “host” country.

International students: International students are those who left their country of
origin and moved to another country for the purpose of study. The country of origin of
a tertiary student is defined according to the criterion of “country of upper secondary
education”, “country of prior education” or “country of usual residence”.

Credit-mobile students: Credit mobility is defined as temporary tertiary education or
study-related traineeships abroad within the framework of enrolment in a tertiary
education program at a home institution, usually for the purpose of gaining academic
credit. Credit-mobile students do not obtain their qualifications from the host
institution abroad.

Degree-mobile students: Degree-mobile students are enrolled as regular students in
any semester/term of a program taught in the country of destination with the
intention of graduating from it in the country of destination (distance learners are not
considered as mobile).
81 https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/17d19cd9-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/17d19cd9-en
39
References


















Alekseeva, E. M., Tarasenko A.V., Surpkelova A. (2020). Student Exchange as the
Instrument of Soft Power Exemplified by Erasmus+ Program. Political Sciences, No. 9,
Vol. 99. pp. 43–51. https://doi.org/10.23670/IRJ.2020.99.9.045
Beregovaya, O., Lopatina, S. & Otrugasheva, N. (2019). Barriers of social and cultural
adaptation of foreign students in Russian universities. Perspectives of Science and
Education, Vol. 38, N. 2, pp. 108-118.
Bryla, P., Ciabiada, B. (2014), Obstacles to International Student Mobility: the case of
Poland,
Trends
Journal
of
Science
Research
December
2014
file:///C:/Users/Elcin/Downloads/Obstacles_to_International_Student_Mobility_the_
Ca.pdf
Lee (2017), Exploring motivations for studying abroad: A case study of Taiwan Tourism
Analysis, 22 (4), pp. 523-536.
Close, D. Tang (2014) “Chinese seek freedom, edge at U.S. high schools”, The Seattle
Times.
de Wit, H. (2015). Misconceptions about (the end of) internationalization. In Jones, E.,
Coelen, R., Beelen, J., de Wit, H. (Eds.), Global and local internationalization (pp. 1520). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
de Wit, H. (2019). Evolving Concepts, Trends, and Challenges in the Internationalization
of Higher Education in the World. Education Studies, N. 2, pp. 8–34.
Hauptman, A.M. (2015), Strategies for Achieving Financial Sustainability in Higher
Education: A Consideration of the Options, Journal of the European Higher Education
Area No. 4
Klahr, S. C., & Ratti, U. (2000). Increasing engineering student participation in study
abroad: A study of U.S. and European programs. Journal of Studies in International
Education, 4(1), pp. 79–102.
Klyachko, T. and Krasnova, G. Education export: current trends and perspectives.
Economics of science, Vol.1, N. 2, pp. 102-100.
Krasnova, G. (2021). Main Trends in Education Export. Moscow: Prospect.
Kuraev, A. (2014). Internationalization of Higher Education in Russia: Collapse or
Perpetuation of the Soviet System? A Historical and Conceptual Study. (Doctoral
dissertation). Boston College.
Latipov Z. (2017). The problem of adaptation of foreign students studying in Russian
universities. Revista Espacios. Vol 38, N. 56. pp. 27-34.
Lee, C. (2017). Exploring motivations for studying abroad: A case study of Taiwan
Tourism Analysis, 22 (4), pp. 523-536.
Minaeva, E. (2020a) Outbound student mobility in Russia: creating a path for brain
circulation through higher education. University Management: Practice and Analysis.
24 (2): 145–156. DOI: 10.15826/umpa.2020.02.020
Minaeva, E. (2020b). Student mobility and education export during the pandemic:
challenges and predictions. Analytical digest on economic and social consequences of
COVID-19 pandemic. Issue 4, pp. 90-95. Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia.
Melikyan A. The International Educational Activity of Russian Universities // Russian
Education and Society. 2018. Vol. 60. No. 8-9, pp. 643-664.
Monitoring of Efficiency of Higher Education Institutions of the Russian Ministry of
Science and Education. (2018). https://monitoring.miccedu.ru/?m=vpo
40








Nefedova, A. (2020). Why International Students Choose to Study at Russia’s Leading
Universities. Journal of Studies in International Education, pp. 1-16. DOI
10.1177/1028315320963514
Nye, J. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: Public
Affairs
Portal Ministerstva Obrazovanija I Nauki RF. (n.d.) [Portal of Education and Science of
Russian Federation], Retrieved from:http://ru.education.mon.gov.ru/articles/2/
Sheregui F. and Arefiev A. University Rankings: International and Russian Experience.
Edited by F.E. / Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. — M.:
Center of Sociological Researches, 2014 - p. 504.
Souto-Otero, M., Huisman, J., Beerkens, M., de Wit, H., Vujić, S. (2013). Barriers to
international student mobility: evidence from the ERASMUS program, Educational
Researcher, 42:70.
Tarrant, M.A., Rubin, D.L., Stoner, L. (2014), The Added Value of Study Abroad:
Fostering a Global Citizenry, Journal of Studies in International Education Vol. 18(2).,
pp. 141-161.
World Bank (2019), Improving Higher Education Policies in Russia
Zangieva I. K., Suleymanova A. N. (2016). Students from the CIS countries in Russia:
prerequisites for migration. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social
Changes, N 5, pp. 127—146.
41