Why are we feeding someone else's science under the sanctions?

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

In accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 682 of May 15, 2018, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation carries out the functions of developing and implementing state policy and legal regulation in the following areas: higher education; scientific, scientific, technical and innovative activities, nanotechnology; etc.

In December 2013, the former leadership of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation issued Order No. 1324, which has an anti-constitutional nature.

We hoped that the Ministry of Science and Higher Education would cancel this order in the part that contradicts the constitutional principles and the sovereignty of Russia.

But the voice of scientists is not heard, despite the fact that scientists shouted out loud about the dangers of these criteria at two Russian professorial forums (in 2018 and 2019), which are held by the RPM - the Russian professors' meeting.

Managers from science respond to complaints from scientists that they say they are fulfilling Putin's decrees, national projects, according to which Russian science must meet international standards. But not a single decree of the President of the Russian Federation says that we should feed someone else's science, and even under the conditions of anti-Russian sanctions.

Critical publications appeared in the media, in scientific journals, and even V. V. Putin talked about the dominance of ordered rule-making that violates the law. And nothing has changed.

The order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation of December 10, 2013 No. 1324 is called "Indicators of the activity of an educational organization of higher education, subject to self-examination." Clause 2 of Appendix No. 4 to this order is called "Indicators of the scientific activity of universities".

These indicators actually legalized discrimination against Russian scientists in comparison with foreign part-time workers who are registered in Russia. So, in many universities in Russia there are foreign scientists who either do not work in Russia at all, or "work" on visits once a year (at a conference), and for the same or even higher wages.

Part-timers report with the same articles as at the main place of work (in their country). Such reporting contradicts the prohibition of double-entry bookkeeping, enshrined in the Federal Law No. 273 "On Combating Corruption". However, such imaginary reporting indicators are stimulated by the indicators introduced by the above Order.

The Order establishes the priority of foreign publications over publications in domestic scientific journals. The notorious Hirsch index depends on foreign publications, regardless of their content.

In fact, This is a direct infringement of national interests, which in the context of Western sanctions looks especially odious: the West presses with sanctions, and we continue to capitalize their journals, simultaneously increasing the rating of their journals and the prices for publications in them. A "hirsch business" emerged(services to increase the citation index to the ordered level).

This business grew out of the need of scientists to increase the Hirsch index, which, having appeared as an imperceptible worm-point of the ministerial order, has already turned into a hydra devouring the essence of science, replacing the content of scientific results with their dubious manifestations.

At present, the prices for intermediary services of firms parasitizing the needs for Scopus publications have grown incredibly: for a publication within 18 months they require $ 3 thousand, within 12 months. - $ 4 thousand. The Hirsch index abroad has long been learned to increase according to the principle of "one loop" (quotation between "friends"). Science abroad is a business with all its wolf laws. There, scholars are paid well for their publications.

Our scientists get nothing for published articles. On the contrary, they themselves pay for the publication of their own articles. It turns out that they pay for their own painstaking work! It is immoral to demand from a teacher publications that are many times higher than the salary of a university teacher. Foreign publications are paid, first of all, by those who buy dissertations on a turnkey basis, they have money. Even the term “dissertation corruption” has appeared.

If we translate the criteria for assessing the scientific activities of universities, established in Order No. 1324, into simple language, this means the following processes, which, like a tsunami, hit universities:

• 1) fetishizing the number of citations, especially in foreign journals;
• 2) the priority of publications and citations in foreign journals and publications;
• 3) displacement of pensioners, incl. professors under the guise of rejuvenating cadres;
• 4) creating advantages for foreign scientists;
• 5) depriving teachers of part of their salaries (bonuses) if they do not have contracts with business entities (clause 2.7 of Order No. 1324);
• 6) commercialization of education.

Clauses 2, 6, 2.7 of the Order force universities to earn money by concluding agreements with economic entities and other entities, and the university is forced, in turn, to force its teachers, incl. humanitarians, to conclude such agreements: the amount of R&D per one scientific and pedagogical worker (in thousand rubles).

As a result, universities oblige their teachers to bring income to the university annually (in some universities - at least 50 thousand rubles per teacher, in others this minimum amount reaches two hundred thousand rubles).

Teachers, unable to conclude a real agreement on "scientific and consulting" services for the company, are looking for some company on the principle of getting to know its head, bring their hard-earned money to this company for a phony contract, according to which the company transfers the same amount to the university's cashier.

Otherwise, it will be considered that the teacher has not fulfilled the R&D indicators and may be deprived of the bonus, or even not conclude a contract for a new term.

The criteria were introduced for universities to enter international rankings. But we will not get into them (except perhaps the Moscow State University), because the starting conditions are unequal.

The Harvard budget is almost 2/3 of the educational budget of Russia. Commercialization completely kills Russian traditions, the upbringing spirit of education.

All these 2013 criteria instill a cult of admiration for Western science, their journals, their scientists. For some reason, it is believed that it is they who set the world level of scientific achievements, and we are on the outskirts of the scientific civilization. A very dubious and harmful attitude.

Message from the President of the Russian Federation V. V. Putin to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on March 1, 2018, was accompanied by a video series of achievements in military technology. We in these areas of science are not on the outskirts of civilization. But can you imagine that these scientists were forced to publish their work abroad? Absurd. But why is this absurdity actually legalized in university science?

Why are many techies, in order not to betray state secrets and not harm Russia's priorities, are forced to fight with the authorities who do not give grants in the absence of foreign publications?In an interview with M. V. Flint (Someone else's science for Russian rubles // Arguments of the Week, 2018-08-02). The physicist won only by contacting the FSB, realizing that "managers from science" were pushing him to treason.

As for the humanities, they are more willing to publish articles abroad that criticize Russian reality.

Ministerial criteria from all sides, whatever one may say, undermine the national sovereignty of Russia.

We see the unconstitutionality of the 2013 criteria in the fact that they legalized discrimination against our scientists and our scientific journals. Meanwhile, restricting the rights of teaching staff or, conversely, creating advantages for someone, regardless of legal criteria (real abilities, business qualities, achievements, creativity), is discrimination.

According to Article 3 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, “no one can be limited in labor rights and freedoms or receive any advantages” depending on those directly named in the law, “as well as on other circumstances not related to the business qualities of the employee”.

This article mirrors the provision of part 2 of article 19 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which says that "the state guarantees equality of human and civil rights and freedoms, regardless" of the circumstances named in this article. Among such circumstances, the Constitution of the Russian Federation also names the property status, place of residence. Why do ministerial criteria especially value foreign scientists living and working abroad, while in our country they are only part-time workers?

When a university reports on publications of a foreign scientist, the university is given the highest score, which, in turn, affects the level of the university's budgetary funding. Hence the higher pay of foreign part-time workers in comparison with their fellow countrymen who work for that guy.

The result is a fantastic picture: the West is strangling Russia with sanctions, and Russia continues to feed their scientists, their science, their journals. And we ourselves consider publications in our journals less valuable, less significant and prestigious than foreign publications..

Isn't this a direct betrayal of national interests?

* * *

The new criteria for the scientific activity of universities initiated a new round of humiliation of the professors. At the First Professorial Forum, held on February 1, 2018 at the RUDN University, the phrase was heard: "Professorship in Russia has been liquidated as a class!"

Under Soviet rule, the professor received at the level of the first secretary of the district committee of the CPSU. But even this is not the main thing, because everyone suffered in the 90s. The main thing is that the professor, who was previously appreciated as the founder and curator, the pillar of the scientific school, in the conditions of the onset of commercialization, has become a kind of burden for the university, especially if he is over 70.

In some Samara universities, an instruction is being implemented to free up space from teachers for 70 regardless of their merits … This is done in different ways: they unite two departments into one, and the "offended" leave on their own, and those who do not think to leave are hinted at the need to rejuvenate the staff.

There is clear age discrimination. Meanwhile, under the guise of rejuvenation, there is a vile tendency of commercialization, when a professor with his regalia and merit becomes economically unprofitable for a university, which finds it easier to maintain two or three low-paid young teachers with an intensive workload than one professor. Professorship is unprofitable for a university that has put money-making on a stream.

There are 29 thousand 800 professors in Russia: 1 professor for every 5 thousand Russians. The lowest rate in European countries. Half of the professors are over 60. We are talking about the extinction of professors not only in the figurative, but also in the literal sense of the word. But scientific schools die along with professors. This is the problem of our intellectual sovereignty.

University science is famous for its traditions, moral atmosphere, scientific schools, postgraduate studies. But graduate school was humiliated in the same way as professors. The point of graduate school was for the best graduates to study with the best professors. Now a C-student can enter graduate school for money. It was not obligatory to defend a dissertation upon completion of postgraduate studies. Since 2008, it is planned to extend the postgraduate study to five years, fortunately, the money for the education is paid by the postgraduate student. And this is presented as a concern for science.

Rector of the RUDN University, Vice-President of the Russian Academy of Sciences A. R. Khokhlov recalled that in the 90s the Russian Union of Rectors was formed to help universities survive. As a result, the rectors were given a salary that was 10-20 times higher than the professor's. The professor is a poor class compared to any manager.

According to Article 37 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, “everyone has the right to freely dispose of their abilities for work” (part 1) and everyone has the right “to remuneration for work without any discrimination” (part 2).

Establishing advantages for foreign scientists also creates a difficult-to-overcome conflict of interests, because the subject of this conflict is a foreign scientist, and in our blood is respect for “guests”.

However, leaders from education have learned to bypass the rules on conflict of interest, including with the help of the Federal Law "On Personal Data", turning into confidential those personal data that were previously publicly available, for example, academic workload. The system hides profitable "snowdrops" and frees itself from nosy troublemakers.

In addition, the ousting of professors is carried out under the guise of reading master's courses by lecturers-practitioners. Who is not accepted as teachers of master's courses, and this is done without competition with obvious abuse and an expanded interpretation of Part 3 of Article 332 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, which allows accepting part-time employees for teaching staff positions without competition for a period of one year. And they take many years in a row every time for a year.

It takes 15-25 years for a university to raise a professor. Each professor is a name, an achievement of the university. In other countries, the status of a professor has long been raised to the proper height. At one time, Professor A. I. Kazannik (ex-Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation) was on an internship in Germany and was amazed that up to four paid assistants were assigned to each professor.

In Germany, the salary scale of the teaching staff depends on the remuneration of the professor, and the word "professor" is put in the professor's passport. And it is customary to address such a citizen with the word "professor".

Some conclusions … Universities cannot be reduced to commercial structures that sell knowledge. The university is a special academic environment in which the title of professor is the property of the university and science in general. Otherwise, all other educational values will crumble like sand.

The criteria for assessing the scientific activities of universities established by Order No. 1324 legalized discrimination against domestic scientists in comparison with foreign ones. All this is served under the guise of international scientific exchange and increasing the publication activity of the university in foreign publications.

No beautiful wrapper can sweeten the bitter pill of discrimination and infringement of national interests

It is necessary to cancel Order No. 1324 in its discriminatory part as soon as possible

It is necessary to raise the prestige of domestic scientific journals to the rank of a national idea

Corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences Mikhail Vladimirovich Flint said that only 350-370 million rubles should be allocated for this. per year for three years (Someone else's science for Russian rubles. Who makes our scientists give their ideas to the West // Arguments of the week, 2018-08-02).

Not the amount that Zenit-Arena, for example, cost (43 billion).

Appendix: Bobrova N. A. "On the unconstitutionality of the criteria for assessing the scientific activities of universities established in 2013" // Constitutional and municipal law. 2018. No. 6 P.42-46

An invitation was sent to scientists by e-mail to publish their articles in a new series of Russian journals. However, among the many requirements for publication, overridingrequirement - must be at least (!) 50%links to foreign publications (and there should be at least 20 links in total). For the natural sciences, such a requirement may be natural. But it is hardly justified for the humanities. We are artificially forced to raise their Hirsch index.

Maybe someone dictates these requirements to us from abroad? Otherwise, we are not very active in publishing there

For example, here's an internet ad:

Here are the Internet messages that come to scientists:

- Good afternoon, we offer you to increase the Hirsch index with our help!

- All specialties!

- Help in writing your doctoral thesis! Experience 17 years. Professional assistance in writing a doctoral dissertation.

Criteria for evaluating the scientific activities of universities in order No. 1324:

2.1. The number of citations in the indexed citation system Scopus per 100 academic staff.

2.3. The number of citations in the RSCI indexed citation system per 100 scientific and pedagogical workers.

2.4. The number of articles in scientific periodicals, indexed by the Scopus citation system.

2.5. The number of articles in scientific periodicals, indexed by the Web citation system.

2.7. R&D volume per one scientific and pedagogical worker (clauses 2.6 and 2.7 - in thousand rubles).

2.14. The number / share of the number of scientific and pedagogical workers with a candidate of science degree up to 35 years old, a doctor of science - up to 40 years old, in the total number of scientific and pedagogical workers.

3.7. Number / share of the number foreign citizens from the number of scientific and pedagogical workers in the total number of scientific and pedagogical workers - people%.

Professors Bobrova N. A. and Oseichuk V. I

Dear Natalya Alekseevna and Vladimir Ivanovich!

I am answering a request for criteria for evaluating scientific activity.

In the Republic of Belarus, publications are listed for the reporting period, indicating the details (journal or collection, year of publication, journal number, collection data, pages).

The best achievements are monographs and publications in the editions of the Higher Attestation Commission.

A list of conferences in which the scientist took part, the names of his reports are also presented.

The concept of “garbage” publications and “garbage” conferences does not exist in Belarus: such a division is unacceptable for science.

In Belarus, there is no criterion for assessing the scientific activities of universities and teaching staff according to their Hirsch index, as there is no preferential (higher) assessment of publications related to the citation system in Scopus, Web of Science.

In Belarus, a teacher is not punished for not having an agreement with an economic entity.

In Belarus, there is no criterion for additional points to the university for the amount of money that the teaching staff brings to the university in the framework of economic (consulting) contracts. The task of the teaching staff is to teach, and not earn money under contracts, which, moreover, are problematic for most specialists, for example, legal theorists, constitutionalists, philologists, historians, etc.).

Best regards, D. M. Demichev

Doctor of Law, Professor, Head of the Department of Theory and History of Law

Belarusian State Economic

university.

Natalia Bobrova,

Doctor of Law, Professor of the Department of Constitutional Law

Togliatti State University, Honored Lawyer of the Russian Federation