Vak experts on the work of the highest certification commission. Vak experts on the work of the supreme attestation commission Expert councils of the vak rf

Members of the Higher Attestation Commission (HAC) and its expert councils signed an appeal to the Minister of Education Olga Vasilyeva demanding the creation of an expert group on deprivation academic degree Minister of Culture Vladimir Medinsky. The appeal was published on the website of the Society of Scientists, it was signed by more than 30 scientists. Below is the full text of the statement.

Statement of the members of the Higher Attestation Commission and the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission

Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation O.Yu. Vasilyeva
Deputy Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences G.V. Trubnikov
Members of the Higher Attestation Commission

STATEMENT

We, the undersigned, members of the Higher Attestation Commission (HAC) and its expert councils are outraged by gross violations of the procedure for organizing work and holding meetings of the Higher Attestation Commission and the "Regulations on the award of academic degrees", admitted when the recommendation was adopted at a meeting of the session of the humanities and social sciences of the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission on 10/20/2017 g. on application for the deprivation of the academic degree of doctor historical sciences V.R. Medinsky.

The Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission on History adopted a reasoned conclusion on the satisfaction of the application for the deprivation of V.R. Medinsky's scientific degree of Doctor of Historical Sciences (applicants Kozlyakov V.N., Erusalimsky K.Yu. and Babitsky I.F.), since his dissertation does not meet the requirements for doctoral dissertations and cannot be considered a scientific research. The Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission did not support this conclusion, refusing to satisfy the above statement of deprivation of the degree. In accordance with clause 20 of the "Procedure for organizing the work of the Higher Attestation Commission" (Order of the Ministry of Education No. 568 of May 16, 2016, as amended on February 20, 2017) "in the event of a discrepancy between the positions of the Commission's expert council and the Commission's position on the issue under consideration, the Chairman of the Commission forms an expert group for preparation of a reasoned opinion on the adopted recommendation of the Commission ”. However, such an expert group from the members of the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission on history and the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission was not created, which is a direct violation of the "Procedure for organizing the work of the Higher Attestation Commission".

The members of the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission tried to familiarize themselves with Medinsky's dissertation work before and during the meeting. They were denied this by the chairman of the Commission V.M. Filippov.

A member of the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission was not admitted to the meeting on October 20, however, persons who were not members of the Higher Attestation Commission were present, and those who had previously acted as official representatives of V.R. Medinsky at the meetings of the dissertation councils and the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission on the application for the deprivation of his academic degree. Who and how compiled the list of those invited to the meeting remained unknown. Members of the session did not vote on the issue of inviting certain persons to the meeting. Thus, the rights and powers of the Presidium of the VAK as a collegial body were usurped by its leadership.

The Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission ignored the information expressed at its meeting that the degree of Doctor of Historical Sciences was received by V.R. Medinsky with gross violations of the prescribed procedure, including, possibly, forgery: the author's abstract of the dissertation was sent to the compulsory distribution libraries, indicating opponents who, according to their testimony, did not participate in its defense, and the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission on history, apparently, did not consider this dissertation at its meeting after its defense in 2011. Thus, the session of the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission ignored the information that V.R. Medinsky, perhaps, should be deprived of an academic degree in connection with a number of gross violations of the Regulation on the award of an academic degree, admitted during the defense of a dissertation and its approval by the Higher Attestation Commission. No verification of this information has been carried out.

We believe that gross violations when the recommendation on the dissertation of V.R. Medinsky is discredited by the Higher Attestation Commission and the entire system of scientific certification in Russia.

In this regard, we demand:

2. Create an independent commission to verify information about a gross violation of the procedure for awarding V.R. Medinsky degree Doctor of History Remove the chairman of the Higher Attestation Commission V.M. Filippov and the former chief scientific secretary of the Higher Attestation Commission N.I. Aristera from participating in the work of this commission due to a conflict of interest.

The initiators of the statement apologize to those members of the Higher Attestation Commission and its expert councils who would like to join the statement, but did not know about it. Unfortunately, the time before the plenum of the Higher Attestation Commission, scheduled for 10/25/2017, which is one of the addressees of the application, was too short to organize the collection of signatures.

They can sign the statement by registering on the site and leaving a comment on this text.

Signed at 14.00 on 25.10.2017

Members of the Higher Attestation Commission

S.Yu. Bershitsky
V.A. Vasiliev
A.A. Huseynov
M.S. Gelfand
I.N. Danilevsky
A.A. Muravyov
N.M. Novikova
A.L. Fradkov
A.V. Spector

EC members for biological sciences

M.V. Bobrovsky
E.A. Bonch-Osmolovskaya
M.V. Donova
G.A. Zhuravleva
E.A. Kosenko
V.V. Kuznetsov
A.S. Mironov
A.V. Filatov

EC members for historical sciences

T.M. Dimoni
V. I. Dyatlov
O.S. Porshneva
V.A. Shnirelman

Members of the ES VAK in mathematics and mechanics

V.V. Izmodenov
SOUTH. Prokhorov
A.N. Phillipov
ON THE. Shirokov
A.K. Tsaturyan
M.V. Yashina

Member of the EC for Geosciences

V.A. Shuper

Member of the EC for therapy

E.Yu. Vasilyeva

Member of the EC for Philology and Art Studies

A.V. Dybo
E.L. Berezovich

Registration N 31405

In accordance with clause 22 of the Regulation on the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science Russian Federation, approved by the decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of September 23, 2013 N 836 (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2013, N 40, art. 5072), I order:

1. To approve the attached Regulations on the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.

2. To recognize as invalid the orders of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation:

dated September 13, 2006 N 226 "On approval of the Regulation on the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation" (registered by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on October 27, 2006, registration N 8408);

dated April 25, 2007 N 124 "On Amending the Regulations on the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, approved by order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia dated September 13, 2006 N 226" (registered by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on May 2, 2007 ., registration N 9368);

dated October 13, 2008 N 289 "On Amending the Regulations on the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, approved by order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation dated September 13, 2006 N 226" (registered by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation November 12, 2008, registration N 12622).

Minister D. Livanov

Appendix

Regulations on the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

The Expert Council gives opinions, taking into account which the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) submits recommendations to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia).

2. The Expert Council carries out its activities on the basis of these Regulations and is guided in its activities by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal constitutional laws, federal laws, decrees and orders of the President of the Russian Federation, decrees and orders of the Government of the Russian Federation, orders of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia.

The main principles of the expert council are competence, independence, objectivity, openness and adherence to the norms of professional ethics.

3. Based on the results of the expert examination, the Expert Council gives the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia and the Commission the following conclusions:

a) on issuing permission to create dissertation councils, on determining and changing their composition, establishing the powers of dissertation councils, determining the lists of scientific specialties for which dissertation councils are granted the right to admit for the defense of dissertations,

on the suspension, resumption and termination of the activities of dissertation councils;

b) on the compliance of dissertations, attestation cases with the established criteria and requirements;

c) on permission to hold a meeting of the dissertation council on the issue of awarding an applicant with the degree of Doctor of Science who has submitted a dissertation for the degree of candidate of sciences to the dissertation council, upon the initiation of a corresponding petition by the dissertation council (hereinafter referred to as the petition);

d) on the recognition of academic degrees obtained in a foreign state;

e) on appeals filed against decisions of dissertation councils on the award of academic degrees;

f) on applications for deprivation (restoration) of academic degrees;

g) about the list and sample programs candidate exams;

h) on the compliance of scientific publications with the requirements established by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia for peer-reviewed scientific publications 1;

i) on draft legal acts, including on draft international treaties of the Russian Federation in the field of training and certification of scientific personnel;

j) according to the nomenclature of specialties of scientific workers (hereinafter referred to as the nomenclature) and compliance with the nomenclature of directions for training scientific and pedagogical personnel in postgraduate studies (postgraduate studies);

k) on proposals, applications, complaints received by the Ministry of Education and Science;

l) on the need to request, in established cases, the dissertation council for publications of applicants to clarify the main scientific results of the dissertation;

m) on the need to request, in established cases, from the dissertation council the text of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of sciences;

n) on a request from the dissertation council for additional information on the passage of the procedure for submitting for defense and defense of a dissertation, on which an appeal has been filed against the decision of this dissertation council, necessary to consider the issue of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia with a decision on an appeal filed against the decision of this dissertation council on the issue of awarding academic degree;

o) on the request, in the established cases, from the dissertation council for information about the publications and place of work of the person in respect of whom the application for deprivation (restoration) of the academic degree necessary for the consideration of the said application has been submitted;

p) on the suspension, resumption and termination of the activities of dissertation councils.

4. On behalf of the Commission, the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, the expert council gives an opinion on other issues in the field of state scientific certification.

5. The opinion of the expert council must be complete, objective and motivated.

6. The Expert Council, when considering the submitted application, invites the applicant for an academic degree to the meeting of the Expert Council.

The expert council, when considering an appeal filed against the decision of the dissertation council on the award of an academic degree, invites to the meeting of the expert council the person who has filed an appeal against the decision of the dissertation council on the award of an academic degree, and the applicant for an academic degree.

The expert council invites to the meeting of the expert council the person who has submitted an application for the restoration of an academic degree and the person in respect of whom this application has been submitted.

7. By decision of the expert council, members of other expert councils and specialists in the relevant fields of knowledge may be invited to its meetings to consider certain issues in the field of state scientific certification. The presence of persons who are not members of the expert council at a meeting of the expert council is allowed with the permission of the head of the structural unit of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, which ensures the implementation functions public policy and state legal regulation in the field of the state system of scientific attestation.

8. The members of the expert council may be present at the meeting of the Commission when considering the issues of confirming the independence of the dissertation, clarifying the new scientific results contained in it, as well as the personal contribution of the dissertation author to science.

9. The Expert Council consists of the Chairman, Deputy Chairmen, Academic Secretary and members of the Expert Council (hereinafter collectively - the members of the Expert Council).

The chairman of the expert council manages the work of the expert council.

The number of members of the expert council must be at least 30 people.

The chairman, deputy chairmen, members of the expert council must have an academic degree of Doctor of Science or an academic degree obtained in a foreign state, recognized in the Russian Federation, the holder of which is granted the same academic and (or) professional rights as the holder of the degree of Doctor of Science obtained In Russian federation. The scientific secretary of the expert council may be a person who has an academic degree of a candidate of sciences or an academic degree obtained in a foreign state, recognized in the Russian Federation, the holder of which is granted the same academic and (or) professional rights as the holder of a scientific degree of a candidate of sciences obtained in Russian Federation.

The composition of the expert council is formed from the number of leading scientists and specialists in the field of science, technology, education and culture, who have at least 10 publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals and (or) patents (certificates) in the last 5 years prior to being included in the expert council. for a utility model, patents for an industrial design, patents for breeding achievements, certificates for programs for electronic computers, databases, topologies of integrated circuits registered in the prescribed manner.

The expert council cannot include managers educational organizations higher education, educational organizations of additional vocational education, scientific organizations, civil servants, as well as chairmen of dissertation councils.

The chairman, deputy chairmen and the scientific secretary of the expert council should not be employees of the same organization (with the exception of expert councils considering issues of state scientific certification related to information constituting a state secret).

10. The composition of expert councils is formed by the Commission taking into account the recommendations of state academies of sciences, the Russian Union of rectors, leading educational institutions of higher education, scientific and other organizations (hereinafter referred to as organizations) and is approved by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia for a period of 4 years with subsequent renewal by at least 25 percent ... At the same time, members of the expert council cannot perform their functions for more than two consecutive terms.

In order to form expert councils, the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia posts on the Commission's official website on the Internet information and telecommunications network (hereinafter referred to as the Commission's official website on the Internet) information on the start of submission to the Russian Ministry of Education and Science of organizations' proposals on candidates for members of expert councils (hereinafter referred to as proposals for candidates). The deadline for the submission of these proposals must be at least 2 months from the date of publication of this information.

Within 10 working days from the end of the deadline for submitting proposals for candidates, the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia shall post information on candidates for members of expert councils on the Commission's official website on the Internet.

Within 15 days from the date of posting information about candidates for members of expert councils on the official website of the Commission on the Internet, organizations have the right to submit to the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia their motivated objections to the inclusion of the proposed candidates as members of expert councils (hereinafter - motivated objections).

The Commission, within 1 month from the date of the end of the submission of motivated objections by organizations, considers the received proposals for candidates and motivated objections, checks the compliance of the proposed candidates for members of expert councils with the requirements specified in paragraph 9 of these Regulations, and makes a recommendation to the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia on the number of expert councils and their composition ...

11. To discuss the conclusions specified in paragraph 3 of these Regulations, the chairman of the expert council appoints rapporteurs from among the members of the expert council to present a report on the issue under discussion (hereinafter - rapporteurs).

12. Members of the expert council are obliged to participate in meetings of the expert council, on the instructions of the chairman of the expert council, prepare draft conclusions of the expert council.

If the performance of the duties of a member of the expert council may entail a conflict of interest that can affect the completeness and objectivity of the decisions made, the member of the expert council is obliged to recuse himself prior to the start of the meeting of the expert council.

13. Organization of work on the preparation of meetings of the expert council, control over the safety of certification cases, their timely consideration is carried out by the academic secretary of the expert council.

14. Meetings of the expert council are held under the leadership of the chairman of the expert council, and in his absence - the deputy chairman of the expert council.

15. The conclusions of the expert council are adopted by an open vote of at least two-thirds of the votes of the members of the expert council present at the meeting.

16. A representative of the structural unit of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, which provides the functions of state scientific certification, has the right to be present at the meeting of the expert council.

17. Members of the expert council who are members of the dissertation council where she defended herself, employees of the organization in which this dissertation was carried out, as well as scientific advisers and scientific advisers of the applicant for a scientific degree who submitted this dissertation to protection.

18. Theses, performed on topics covering several scientific specialties or branches of science, are sent to several expert councils for consideration.

19. The conclusions of the expert council are signed by the person presiding at its meeting, the academic secretary of the expert council, and the speakers.

The conclusions of the expert council are presented at the meetings of the Commission by the chairman of the expert council or his deputies, or a rapporteur.

20. In case of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment by a member of the expert council of the duties assigned to him, the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia has the right to exclude him from the expert council on the basis of the Commission's recommendation.

Information on the exclusion of a person from the expert council is posted on the official website of the Commission on the Internet.

21. The chairman of the expert council submits to the chairman of the Commission and the head of the subdivision of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, which provides the functions of state scientific certification, a report on his work for the past year no later than January 20 of the current year.

1 Paragraph one of clause 12 of the Regulations on the award of academic degrees, approved by the Government of the Russian Federation of September 24, 2013 N 842 (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2013, N 40, art. 5074).

Pavel Yuryevich Uvarov - Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, since 2013 - Chairman of the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation on History

Land of the Soviets

Since Soviet times, the word "VAK" was used to frighten unreasonable candidates for a degree. “We understand well the idea of the author, but there are such people in the Higher Attestation Commission that it is necessary to write much more clearly for them,” they often said at the defense, demanding to revise the conclusion to the dissertation. Quotes in the genre of ressentiment were often heard: "Where is the VAK looking?" Sometimes there were arguments in the spirit of Pontius Pilate: “Of course, I could not give a negative review, but I expressed everything that I think about this work, and then let the VAK figure it out on its own. If everything suits him, then I wash my hands. " Among the applicants, languishing in anticipation of the cherished "crusts", there were rumors about the missing dissertation, discovered many years later, when the typist quit, who placed this volume under the seat of a chair to make it easier to type. And I don’t remember any positive responses about this organization.

But for five years now Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation tried on the role of a newsmaker. From time to time, journalists besiege the staff of this venerable organization, demanding interviews, and then not only social networks, but also the official news feeds explode with news from the fields of dissertation battles. Unfortunately for funds mass media VAK is interesting mainly as a source of scandals. The normal course of his work does not arouse the curiosity of the general public. But the scientific community, in principle, should be interested in the work of this organization, because the functioning of science and education as social institutions is still based on the system of awarding degrees or "scientific degrees", as M.V. Lomonosov.

The second issue of "Historical Expertise" contained the material of the secretary of the Dissertation Council of the Institute of History in St. Petersburg about a sensational defense and my interview as the chairman of the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission on history. There I complained that we did not have independent channels of communication either with dissertation councils or with the scientific community. All envisaged forms of "dialogue" with advice are reduced to the ability to issue a remark or warning to them for a particular violation. Two such warnings - and the council is closed. And what if we do not want to close it, but simply give some recommendation if we have comments or questions? True, we can summon a dissertation candidate, accompanied by a representative of the council, to our meeting. This form, it would seem, can be used as a way of scientific communication. But if we often summon dissertation candidates to our meetings and let them go home without any punitive measures, then they may see a corruption component in our liberalism, and again they will deprive them of the right to invite "recruits."

In fact, interesting things are said at the meetings of our council, sometimes, certain aspects of scientific conventions are specified. Unlike many meetings, the sessions of the ES VAK on history are a place for discussion, scientists are mainly experienced and bright and, at times, it is very offensive that everything that has been said remains only our property.

Therefore, I would like to find a suitable platform for addressing "the city and the world." And who should the expert advice turn to if not the Historical Expertise? I hope that we will succeed in the dialogue.

To begin with, we sent out a simple questionnaire with questions to all members of the ES VAK. So far, three people have responded to the call to fill it out. We begin our acquaintance with our advice with these texts.

But first we need to remind about the forms and conditions of our work.

The Expert Council is formed on a purely voluntary basis. The rotation rules are not strictly spelled out, it is believed that the minimum term of office on the Council is four years, but in fact, you can stay in its ranks much longer. In its current composition (which can be found on the VAK website), the council has been functioning since the beginning of 2014. We meet twice a month, meetings should last three hours, but often they drag on for another hour or two.

You don't get paid for this work. And even the travel expenses for nonresident members of the Expert Council are paid not by the Higher Attestation Commission, but by the universities in which they work, which is not very pleasant for their management. Indeed, this situation looks strange. But on the other hand, we can feel more independent.

We receive dissertation cases. In the case of candidate dissertations - abstracts, council conclusions, meeting transcripts. Doctors of sciences, in addition to this, also send volumes of theses themselves.

Each of those present chooses himself or receives two or three dissertations "in load". He gets to know them, checks the documentation, then comes up with a short summary and voices his proposal. Sometimes the speaker is asked clarifying questions, but sometimes controversy unfolds. As a result, a collective decision is made - to support or not support the conclusion of the Dissertation Council. You can put a question to a vote, but this happens quite rarely.

In one day, we usually consider four to five doctoral dissertations and 10-15 master's theses.

In addition, we check applications for opening new councils and making partial changes to the composition of existing councils. It is taken into account how the proposed candidates meet the requirements, which are becoming more and more stringent from year to year. Now expertise has been added to our responsibilities. scientific journals from the "VAK list", but this is a separate subject for conversation. Sometimes we hear those who were previously summoned to our meeting - the dissertation candidate himself and the representative of the council in which his defense took place. Based on the results, we can either let the "outgoing" people go in peace, or disagree with the decision of the Dissertation Council and not recommend the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission to confer the required degree. However, the Presidium may not accept our recommendation. There is another option - we can send the dissertation for an additional conclusion to another dissertation council of this profile. But this is now considered an exceptional measure used in rare cases.

All Dissertation Councils in Russia, as well as DSs of the Republic of Tajikistan, fall under our "jurisdiction". But very soon the advice of St. Petersburg State University and Moscow State University will get out of our control.

How do you become a member of the EC? The rules here get more complicated from year to year. But the point is not in increasing scientific exactingness, but in the difficulty of filling out electronic forms for online registration in the ministerial computer. From the candidates who have successfully passed this procedure, we select those who we really need. Now we really miss orientalists, but for two years in a row they have been sending their questionnaires by mail, and they either cannot or do not want to register electronically. You have to do it on your own.

Well, perhaps, everything is about us.

I now give the floor to my colleagues. The first to respond were the most reliable ones - the "old-timers" of our council Aleksey Vladimirovich Chernetsov, Chief Researcher of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and Irina Aleksandrovna Khormach, Leading Researcher of the Institute Russian history RAS. They were soon joined by Igor Konstantinovich Kiryanov, professor at Perm State University.

Thank you very much for that.

These rights were transferred from expert councils to the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission in 2014. Probably, in this way they wanted to exclude the possibility of corruption. But, since all humanitarians were examined in one day, and only economists were summoned by 15-20 people, as a result, no more than 10 minutes were allotted for consideration of each dissertation. And all the same, the meeting dragged on for six to seven hours, causing suffering to both the “recruits” and the members of the Presidium. And only at the end of 2016 they returned to their previous practice.

I completely forgot - we are still considering cases of nostrification - the recognition of a foreign degree by our Higher Attestation Commission. Most often we are talking about Kazakh, Armenian and Ukrainian works.

Alexey Vladimirovich Chernetsov - Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of Ch. scientific. employee

Institute of Archeology RAS

About the author: Doctor of Historical Sciences (1989), Professor (2004). For more than 20 years he was in charge of a large department at an academic institute; member of two dissertation councils. For more than 10 years he was involved in the examination of projects in the RFBR and the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation. I have significant publishing experience (I worked as a scientific editor for 6 years, prepared for publication one of the volumes of "Archeology of the USSR" and 5 volumes of "Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Slavic Archeology", long-term member of the editorial boards of the journals "Russian Archeology" and "Living Starina"). I have many years of experience in field archaeological activities (including more than 15 years as the head of a large expedition). Since 1996 I have been combining scientific activity with the teaching staff. Prepared four graduate students who successfully defended their dissertations.

Having worked in the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission for quite a long time, I consider, on the whole, the activities of this body positive, and the team taking part in its work is quite qualified. I note that in the most general terms, the state of affairs in academic science (primarily in the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences) seems to me to be more prosperous than the situation in universities and university science, and in both of these areas - more prosperous than in ministries and departments. I mean, first of all, the problems of professional qualifications of personnel and corruption.

Turning to the consideration of dissertations and the examination process passing through our council, I consider it necessary to note, first of all, the absence of cases when experts, for the sake of opportunistic considerations or any pressure, prevented the appropriation of one or another serious scientific work deserved degree. Perhaps such episodes took place in the distant past, but they were not in my memory.

Rather, one can accuse our expert council (including me) of being too lenient, of supporting works that should have been rejected. This phenomenon is associated with the legacy of the Soviet era, when the democratization of the scientific community was accompanied by a lowering of the bar for qualification work. As a result, 20-30% of successfully defended and approved dissertations, in my opinion, should be rejected. But we consistently translate the "C-grade" into "C-grade", and, even worse, we turn many "L-grade" students into "C-grade". In our scientific community, underestimated stereotypes have developed, and when trying to refuse support for one or another work, experts are faced with the question: "How will we explain our decision to the dissertation candidate and representatives of his council, if it has become customary in the scientific community to regard such works as conditional?"

It would seem that this question is easy to answer - "we were guided by the approved regulatory requirements." But in fact, these requirements exist, but in fact they are ignored by both the scientific councils and the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission. The fact is that the Soviet era, which left its tenacious legacy, was distinguished by its love for pompous reports of achievements and successes. Accordingly, a doctoral dissertation is formally required to solve a major scientific problem and created a new direction in research activities. It is no secret that no more than 10% of successfully defended doctoral dissertations meet these requirements. As a result, the main criterion for the quality of a doctoral dissertation is actually the volume of material newly introduced into science (or interpreted in a new way), and for historical works it is also the breadth of geographical and chronological coverage. The average Russian doctor of sciences, as he is today, is not a generator of ideas and not a leader scientific direction, but an ordinary scientist who showed sufficient diligence and erudition. Let me emphasize that, nevertheless, such a doctor of sciences is a much more solid scientific value than an ordinary western PhD, and we should have maintained at least this level. The actual state of affairs would be more consistent with a slight decrease in the requirements for doctoral dissertations in instructional documents. At the same time, perhaps, the above indicators should be supplemented by such requirements as “the ability to prepare graduate students, as well as to act as an expert within the framework of their specialization.” In other words, “on paper” the unnecessarily high requirements for doctoral dissertations should be mitigated (as long as they are not met at all).

In candidate dissertations, one often comes across the statement that the work in question is the first truly scientific research on this topic (more modest dissertators write that the scientific study of this topic was started by their supervisor). Such statements, as well as reports that this work raises the consideration of the issue under study to a "new level", are usually declarations that do not correspond to reality. The need to avoid such mistakes should be pointed out to future candidates for a degree; they should be cleared from the work of their students by scientific supervisors, as well as academic councils that accept dissertations for defense. I would like to note that my experience of working in dissertation councils testifies to the weakening of the attention of scientific leaders to the dissertations of their graduate students. At defenses, sometimes such obvious flaws are revealed that a scientific advisor could not have allowed if he had carefully read the dissertation. It seems that such an attitude of scientific leaders to their duties should not go unpunished.

Speaking specifically about my specialty, I would like to note that, in principle, it is expected from a novice scientist (candidate of sciences) in our specialty: 1) the ability to independently conduct field research and 2) become an expert in the source interpretation of a particular group of antiquities (periods and territories, or, say, ceramics, jewelry, weapons). Recently, instead, we are often offered research on the history of archaeological science. It seems that it is difficult for beginners to choose a topic provided by the material. Meanwhile new material accumulates annually in such quantities that the existing scientific teams cannot cope with it. Will an aspirant in historiography purposefully gain field experience? Who will contact him and with what special questions in the future? There are no clear answers to these questions. In addition, it is obvious that it is wrong to defend such topics under the heading "archeology". All this must find its place in the "history of science." In the same way, it seems wrong that quite numerous dissertations on geophysical or paleozoological study of archaeological materials are being defended in the specialty "archeology". In dissertation councils, where such defenses take place, there are no or practically no specialists who can assess the merits of a thesis, its specific methodology and argumentation. As a result, we get graduated specialists in historical sciences, who are often unfamiliar with the basics of historical problems. I think that representatives of other historical (and not only historical) sciences meet with similar problems.

The scientific community cannot remain indifferent to changes in the field of higher education, since it is there that new personnel are being trained. In this regard, the introduction of an additional academic (?) Degree - a master's - causes great bewilderment. Obviously, a master's thesis should be weaker than a weak candidate's thesis (that is, completely useless "research" work). This entire reform is accompanied by a broadcast campaign calling for the transformation of student diplomas into full-fledged scientific research. But this is already pure demagoguery, in no way corresponding to reality.

In the post-revolutionary years and even in the post-war years, many prominent scientists combined research activities with the teaching staff. This was partly due to the lack of qualified personnel. Now the situation is different - in the system of universities, professional teaching personnel (as a rule, are strongly inferior in qualifications to academic scientists) decisively prevail. Here, it seems, a major reform is needed - it is necessary to restore practically broken ties; academic institutions need a direct connection with educational centers from where they will receive replenishment.

The destructive role of Soviet traditions is especially pronounced in works on politicized, topical topics. Science-based journalism and politically correct declarations, which replaced research, were in vogue here.

Meanwhile, many very important and topical topics cannot be fully studied within the framework of academic science until the main fund of sources on the problem is declassified. If, while working on a similar topic, a researcher uses only open materials, while the most important sources are not available to him, his research cannot be called fundamental, suffers from incompleteness. If he has access to classified materials that are inaccessible to his colleagues and possible critics, opponents and experts, the research cannot be considered academic, and should be classified as departmental. The above concerns research in the field of international relations, or, for example, works devoted to the illegal activities of Islamists of our days.

The issue of the defense and peer review of dissertations requires attention to the observance of various formal requirements. It is very good that such obligatory headings as "novelty", "source base", etc. have appeared in the author's abstracts. Unfortunately, they are not always disclosed properly (the headings include data that does not correspond to the headings, or information that is incomplete). Unfortunately, in recent years, the normative requirements for the abstracts of dissertations have lost their certainty. Once upon a time it was not allowed to include bibliography in author's abstracts (except for a list of works by the applicant himself on the topic); other authors were referred to, indicating only the name of the researcher and the year of publication. Now there are abstracts oversaturated with bibliography (up to 1/3 of the volume); abstracts with tables and illustrations appear. In my opinion, the Higher Attestation Commission should bring some clarity to the question of the standards for the preparation of abstracts.

The negative manifestations of the legacy of the Soviet era include the poor command of a number of candidates for a degree in foreign languages, and sometimes neglect of foreign scientific literature. Unfortunately, there are even doctoral dissertations in which there are no or almost no references to the literature on foreign languages... Meanwhile, doctors of sciences, by definition, must deal with fundamental problems, and, accordingly, know the basic foreign works on this issue and related problems. In Ph.D. theses, such a defect occurs even more often. At the same time, you can always find works by foreign authors who wrote on a similar topic, or solved a similar problem on other material. Unfortunately, both in candidate's and doctoral theses, there are often illiterate footnotes to publications in foreign languages. Accent marks in literature titles in Polish, Romanian and Baltic languages are particularly affected. Unfortunately, many Russian authors are not able to correctly convey the names and titles of the works of their Ukrainian and Belarusian colleagues. All this makes a corresponding impression on the scientific community of these countries. I believe that dissertation candidates, supervisors and academic councils should pay more attention to eliminating such errors. Concluding the passage devoted to language problems, it is necessary to point out that the expert council should not receive works in broken Russian, in the author's version containing gross errors. Unfortunately, this is found in a number of works prepared in Tajikistan. These works should be submitted to the Higher Attestation Commission only after professional editing (at the expense of dissertation candidates or institutions presenting dissertations).

When considering works that consider the problems covered in the literature and sources in less common languages, the expert council needs in each case complete information about the language training of the candidate for the degree. An appeal to the vast corpus of Old Russian translated texts, or, for example, to the activities of such a figure as Maxim the Greek, requires, in my opinion, a thorough acquaintance with the medieval Greek... If it is about the ethnography or folklore of a particular people, it is necessary, again, to indicate whether the candidate for the dissertation is fluent in the language (dialect, dialects) of the studied people or not.

It seems to me that the scientometric requirements for dissertation candidates, dissertation councils, opponents and experts are unjustifiably overestimated. In addition, I see some distortions in them. In my opinion, the provision that scientists should not present scientific reference and educational materials instead of research materials in the lists of works is, in principle, fair. On the other hand, a scientist applying for a doctoral degree, for broad erudition, should have such works in the list of works. If he does not have them at all, this is still a definite disadvantage.

The widespread practice of "typing" the publications necessary for the protection of urgently for a fee seems unacceptable. This is outright corruption (the candidates themselves, academic councils and editorial boards of scientific journals are directly or indirectly involved in it). This practice makes the defense of dissertations dependent not on the labor and abilities of the applicants, but on money. I believe that all scientific publications that openly take money for publications should be excluded from the list of the Higher Attestation Commission.

Irina Aleksandrovna Hormach - Doctor of Historical Sciences, Leading Researcher, IRI RAS

1. What trends can be distinguished by observing the flow of dissertations in recent years?

1) The flow of dissertations has decreased by an order of magnitude. Hopefully, the issue of defending any dissertation has become more serious.

2) There are significantly fewer doctoral dissertations that have completely absorbed the candidate's dissertation of the same researcher. Obviously, the ban on self-citation influenced, although it did not concern such forms of using one's own material.

3) Scientific supervisors of applicants for the degree of candidate of historical sciences, while preparing several graduate students at the same time, have become less likely to offer their students a single template for writing abstracts.

4) There are fewer frankly weak and helpless works, but perhaps this is due to a general reduction in the number of defended dissertations.

5) Opponents are much better matched

6) Candidate and doctoral dissertations began to be defended with a significant number of publications. but the volume of publications of the majority of applicants decreased in proportion to the increase in their number. Sometimes an applicant for the degree of Doctor of Historical Sciences has 15 articles with a volume of 0.3 - 0.4 pp. and one or two co-authored monographs. This is a very dangerous trend.

What are the typical mistakes and shortcomings characteristic of both dissertation candidates and Dissertation Councils?

1) One of the most common mistakes is the incorrect wording in the Conclusion of the Councils about the applicant's contribution to the development of the problem under study.

2) Small topics and the absence of a problem in the formulation of the topic of the dissertation, and therefore in the study itself. Unfortunately, the expert himself often has to figure out for the applicant what kind of problem he wanted to highlight and analyze in his work.

3) The lack of a competent review of sources in many dissertations. Some applicants are unable to explain how the source differs from historical research, and even more so, to analyze different types of sources.

4) Insufficient attention of many dissertation councils to the preparation of one of the most important defense documents - Conclusions.

5) A considerable number of abstracts are written carelessly: the objectives of the research are not clearly set, the content of the dissertation is poorly or too briefly stated, conclusions are completely absent or summaries of chapters are replaced. This approach does not allow the expert to adequately evaluate the candidate's dissertation, since the abstract is the only essay of the applicant that the expert can familiarize himself with when making his decision.

What wishes can be expressed to candidates for a degree, Dissertation Councils. Expert Council. VAK as a whole?

1) Establish a certain permissible rate of use in the text of a doctoral dissertation of an already defended candidate dissertation of the applicant, at least 20%.

2) Introduce a rule on the mandatory publication of a one-man full-fledged monograph (and not a brochure) for an applicant for a doctorate in historical sciences and 7-8 articles of at least 1 pp. (instead of the current norm of 15 articles without indicating the lower limit of the publication volume).

3) To enable the expert council to call applicants to clarify issues such as material ownership, authorship, knowledge of sources and historiography, as well as request texts of candidate dissertations from authors who did not show deep knowledge of the subject in the abstract.

4) Dissertation councils should prepare their Conclusion not according to a template, but in accordance with the individual characteristics of each work.

Igor K. Kiryanov, Professor (Perm State National Research University)

1. What trends can be distinguished by observing the flow of dissertations in recent years?

Reduction in the number of doctoral dissertations (in no small measure due to the requirement to publish at least 15 articles for the applicant in publications included in the list of the Higher Attestation Commission);

An increase in the number of candidate dissertations, in which the analysis of a particular problem is limited by the framework of one administrative-territorial unit;

An increase in the number of dissertations devoted to the "hottest" modern times.

2. What mistakes and shortcomings are characteristic of both dissertation candidates and dissertation councils?

The lack of a systematic approach in formulating scientific relevance, problem field, object and subject, goals and objectives of research, choosing a methodology and characterizing the source base - these sections in the introduction are in many cases separate from each other;

Quite often in doctoral dissertations, and even more often in candidate dissertations, when formulating the research goal, the emphasis is on the process (“to conduct complex analysis», For example), and not on the result;

Often, the historiographic plot in dissertations, especially candidate dissertations, has the character of a detailed bibliographic description, and does not characterize the process of incrementing historical knowledge on the problem under study, but in dissertations on national history it’s just a problem with the analysis of foreign historiography — at best, one or two works are mentioned ritually and non-systematically;

In many dissertations, especially candidate's, the methodological plot in the introduction is of a ritual nature: the principles of "historicism and scientific objectivity" are mentioned, although, in my opinion, historians are engaged in interpreting historical process based on a certain conceptual approach. One or another conceptual approach is inextricably linked with certain (sometimes specific) methods and research techniques, meanwhile, in rare dissertations, one can trace the relationship between the conceptual rationale of the research and the methods used, a detailed description of specific research techniques;

Perhaps the weakest point in most dissertations (and even more so in abstracts) is the characterization of the source base of the study. The typology and ranking of groups of sources should be associated with their informative potential for achieving the goal and objectives of the study, with the selected research methodology, i.e. there is no place for a stencil approach;

Dissertation councils should be more responsible in preparing conclusions, and not limit their role to editing the "fish" written by the applicant or his supervisor.

3. What wishes can be expressed to dissertation candidates, dissertation councils, expert council. VAK as a whole?

Dissertation councils, primarily those working in regional institutions, are less reinsured in their requirements for applicants and their dissertations, especially when selecting opponents;

Reduce the number of articles required for the defense of doctoral dissertations, but oblige applicants to publish a full-fledged monograph in university and academic publishing houses;

Even with a positive result of the examination of the candidate's dissertation, provide for the possibility for the expert council in its conclusions to pay attention to certain shortcomings (of course, within the limits of humanism);

It would be good to think about the date of the "end of history". It is unlikely that the historian's toolkit is suitable for analyzing problems. today, in this case it is impossible to look back;

It is necessary to solve the problem of financing the activities of dissertation councils. It is no secret that today almost all costs are paid by the applicant, and the current budgets of most universities simply do not allow funding this activity.

Project dossier

Explanatory note

In accordance with clause 20 of the Regulation on the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, approved by the Government of the Russian Federation of March 26, 2016 N 237 (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2016, N 14, Art. 1996), I order:

1. To approve the attached Regulations on the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.

2. To declare invalid:

Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation of December 25, 2013 N 1393 "On approval of the Regulation on the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation" (registered by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on February 24, 2014, registration N 31405);

clause 2 of the order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation of December 10, 2015 N 1446 "On approval of the Regulation on the Special Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation" (registered by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation on March 2, 2016, registration N 41295).

Appendix

APPROVED BY
by order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
dated "____" ________ 2018 N _____

POSITION
on the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

1. The Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Expert Council) is created to carry out an examination of the compliance of dissertations for the degree of candidate of science, for the degree of Doctor of Science (hereinafter referred to as the dissertation) and attestation cases with the established criteria, and requirements, for the preparation of opinions on the awarding of academic degrees, for the preparation of opinions on applications from organizations for the issuance of permits for the creation on their basis of councils for the defense of dissertations for the degree of candidate of science, for the degree of doctor of science (hereinafter - dissertation councils), the definition and changing the composition of dissertation councils, determining the list of scientific specialties for which dissertation councils are granted the right to accept dissertations for defense, on the suspension, renewal, termination of the activities of dissertation councils, as well as on the recognition of academic degrees and academic titles received in a foreign country, preparation of opinions on appeals filed against decisions of dissertation councils (hereinafter - appeals), on the award of academic degrees, on the deprivation (restoration) of academic degrees.

In cases and on issues stipulated by the Regulation on the award of academic degrees, approved by the Government of the Russian Federation of September 24, 2013 N 842 (Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2013, N 40, Art. 5074; 2014, N 32, Art. 4496; 2016, N 18, Art. 2629; 2017, N 37, Art. 5513 (hereinafter - the Regulation on the award of academic degrees), the expert council gives the conclusions of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia.

The main principles of the expert council are competence, independence, objectivity, openness and adherence to the norms of professional ethics.

3. The expert council, based on the results of the examination, gives conclusions:

a) on the issuance of a permit for the creation of dissertation councils, on the determination and change of their composition, on the establishment of the powers of dissertation councils, on the determination of the lists of scientific specialties for which dissertation councils are granted the right to admit for the defense of dissertations, on the suspension, renewal and termination of the activities of dissertation councils;

b) on the compliance of the content of the materials presented in the attestation file with the requirements and the dissertation criteria, which the dissertation must satisfy, established by the Regulations on the award of academic degrees;

c) on permission to hold a meeting of the dissertation council on the issue of awarding an applicant with the scientific degree of Doctor of Science, who has submitted a dissertation for the degree of candidate of science to the dissertation council, upon the initiation of a corresponding petition by the dissertation council;

d) on the recognition of academic degrees and academic titles obtained in a foreign state;

e) on appeals filed against decisions of dissertation councils on the award of academic degrees;

f) on applications for deprivation (restoration) of academic degrees;

g) on the list of candidate exams;

h) on the compliance or non-compliance of peer-reviewed scientific publications with the requirements established by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia for peer-reviewed scientific publications, and their inclusion in the list of peer-reviewed scientific publications or their exclusion from the list of peer-reviewed scientific publications;

i) on draft legal acts, including on draft international treaties of the Russian Federation in the field of training and certification of scientific personnel;

j) according to the nomenclature of scientific specialties for which academic degrees are awarded (hereinafter referred to as the nomenclature), and compliance with the nomenclature of directions for training scientific and pedagogical personnel in postgraduate studies (postgraduate studies);

k) on proposals, applications, complaints received by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia;

l) on the request, in the cases established by the Regulation on the award of academic degrees, from the dissertation council for publications of applicants to clarify the main scientific results of the dissertation, as well as other materials confirming the compliance of the dissertation with the criteria established by the Regulation on the award of academic degrees;

m) on the need to provide an expert council in the cases established by the Regulations on the awarding of academic degrees with the text of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of sciences on paper or in electronic form;

o) on the request, in the cases established by the Regulations on the Awarding of Academic Degrees, from the dissertation council for information about the publications and place of work of the person in respect of whom the application for deprivation (restoration) of the academic degree necessary for the consideration of the said application has been submitted;

p) on the invitation to the meeting of the expert council of the applicant for a scientific degree, the chairman or deputy chairman of the dissertation council, in which the thesis was defended or an additional conclusion on it was prepared, persons who filed appeals, persons who submitted applications for deprivation of an academic degree, on the restoration of an academic degree, and persons in respect of whom these applications have been submitted, as well as other persons related to the essence of the issue considered at this meeting, members of other expert councils, leading specialists in the relevant field of science, in the cases and in the manner prescribed by the Regulation on the award of academic degrees.

4. On behalf of the Commission, the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, the expert council gives an opinion on other issues in the field of state scientific certification.

5. The opinion of the expert council must be complete, objective and motivated.

6. By decision of the expert council, members of other expert councils and specialists in the relevant fields of knowledge may be invited to its meetings to consider certain issues in the field of state scientific attestation. The presence of persons who are not members of the expert council at a meeting of the expert council is allowed with the permission of the head of the department of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, which provides the functions of state scientific certification.

7. Members of the expert council may be present at a meeting of the Commission when considering issues of confirming the independence of the dissertation, clarifying the new scientific results contained in it, as well as the personal contribution of the dissertation author to science.

8. The Expert Council consists of the Chairman, Deputy Chairmen, Academic Secretary and members of the Expert Council (hereinafter collectively - the members of the Expert Council).

The chairman of the expert council manages the work of the expert council.

The number of members of the expert council must be at least 30 people.

The expert council cannot include the heads of educational institutions of higher education, educational organizations of additional professional education, scientific organizations, civil servants, as well as the chairmen of dissertation councils, as well as specialists who are scientific leaders (consultants) of one or more persons in respect of whom the Ministry of Education and Science Russia, within five years preceding the presentation of the recommendations of the organizations specified in paragraph 9 of these Regulations on the inclusion of this specialist in the expert council, decisions were made to deprive the academic degree.

The chairman, deputy chairmen and the scientific secretary of the expert council should not be employees of the same organization.

9. The composition of expert councils is formed by the Commission taking into account the recommendations of the state academies of sciences, the Russian Union of rectors, leading educational institutions of higher education, scientific and other organizations (hereinafter referred to as organizations) and is approved by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia for a period of 4 years with subsequent renewal by at least 25 percent the composition of the expert council, approved at the time of its formation. At the same time, members of the expert council cannot perform their functions for more than two consecutive terms.

In order to form (update the composition) of expert councils, as well as when making changes to the composition of the expert council, the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia posts on the official website of the Commission in the information and telecommunication network "Internet" (hereinafter - the official website of the Commission on the Internet) information about the start of the presentation to the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia proposals of organizations on candidates for members of expert councils (hereinafter referred to as proposals for candidates). The deadline for the submission of these proposals must be at least 2 months from the date of publication of this information.

The Commission, within 1 month from the date of the end of the submission of motivated objections by organizations, considers the received proposals for candidates and motivated objections, checks the compliance of the proposed candidates for members of expert councils with the requirements specified in paragraph 8 of these Regulations, and makes a recommendation to the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia on the number of expert councils and their composition or about changes in the composition of individual expert councils.

10. To discuss the conclusions specified in paragraph 3 of these Regulations, the chairman of the expert council appoints rapporteurs from among the members of the expert council to present a report on the issue under discussion (hereinafter - rapporteurs).

11. Members of the expert council are obliged to participate in meetings of the expert council, on behalf of the chairman of the expert council to prepare draft conclusions of the expert council.

12. Organization of work on the preparation of meetings of the expert council, control over the safety of certification cases, their timely consideration is carried out by the academic secretary of the expert council.

13. Meetings of the expert council are held under the leadership of the chairman of the expert council, and in his absence - the deputy chairman of the expert council, determined by the chairman of the expert council.

14. Conclusions of the expert council are adopted by open vote. The conclusion is considered adopted if at least two-thirds of the number of persons who are members of the expert council and present at the meeting voted for it.

15. A representative of a subdivision of the Russian Ministry of Education and Science, which provides the functions of state scientific certification, has the right to be present at the meeting of the expert council.

16. Members of the expert council who are members of the dissertation council where she defended herself, employees of the organization in which this dissertation was carried out, as well as scientific advisers and scientific consultants of the applicant for a scientific degree who submitted this dissertation to protection.

17. Dissertations carried out on topics covering several scientific specialties or branches of science are sent to several expert councils for consideration.

18. The conclusions of the expert council are signed by the person presiding at its meeting, the academic secretary of the expert council, speakers.

The conclusions of the expert council are presented at the meetings of the Commission by the chairman of the expert council or his deputy or a rapporteur.

19. In case of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment by a member of the expert council of the duties assigned to him, the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia has the right to exclude him from the composition of the expert council on the basis of the recommendation of the Commission.

Information on the exclusion of a person from the expert council is posted on the official website of the Commission on the Internet.

20. The chairman of the expert council submits to the chairman of the Commission and the head of the department of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, which provides the functions of state scientific attestation, a report on his work for the past year no later than January 20 of the current year.

Document overview

A new regulation on the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia has been prepared.

It is specified that the council is being created, among other things, for the preparation of opinions on the petitions of organizations for the issuance of permits for the creation of dissertation councils on their basis.

The list of conclusions issued by the council based on the results of the examination is being corrected.

It is stated that the council cannot also include scientific supervisors (consultants) of one or more persons, in respect of whom the Ministry, within 5 years preceding the presentation of recommendations on the inclusion of the head (consultant) in the council, made decisions on deprivation of an academic degree.

Full version of the article; abridged in * .pdf and paper version of the newspaper.

Over the past 5 years of Dissernet's activity, dozens of members of the VAK expert councils (ES VAK) have been identified who directly participated in the defense of dissertations with massive incorrect borrowings. However, reputation mechanisms in a number of sciences still do not work, and so far such persons are not prohibited from entering the ES of the Higher Attestation Commission.

Unfortunately, the requirements for members of the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission have not changed since the end of 2013. Only some qualification requirements are imposed on candidates: the presence of a doctorate degree, the presence of at least 10 publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals over the past 5 years (meaning, first of all, journals from the Higher Attestation Commission list).

Such a low qualification threshold for entering the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission is combined with the presence in them of persons who have repeatedly been noticed accompanying dissertations with massive incorrect borrowings. Their presence in expert councils guarantees the passage through the Higher Attestation Commission of low-quality dissertations, defended in "native" organizations, and helps to fend off applications for the deprivation of academic degrees.

Bright negative example what has been said may be the activity of MI Lomakin, deputy. Chairman of the Council on Sectoral and Regional Economics, who for many years not only covered the activities of the Dissertation Council on Economics in Standardform, but also contributed to the spread of ideas that incorrect borrowing is not such in the case of “general scientific school", Descriptions of common truths or well-known phenomena.

Despite the ongoing purges of expert councils (for example, councils on economics in 2014), there are still those PhDs who acted as scientific advisers or opponents of fake dissertations (this is typical mainly for expert councils in the humanities). See Dissernet collections.

Now there is a planned rotation of members of all expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission. The VAK website contains lists of candidates, which Dissernet analyzed according to several indicators:

participation in the defense of dissertations with massive incorrect borrowing (as a scientific advisor and opponent);
having your own dissertation with incorrect borrowings;
the presence of repeated publications, publications with mysterious authorship or publications with incorrect borrowings;
the presence of publications in the journals of the Scopus database, which were excluded from it for lack of independent peer review (we are talking primarily about "junk" journals that practice paid publications without appropriate peer review).

The results of our monitoring are grouped in Table 1.

Table 1. Results of monitoring of the Dissertation of the candidate for membership in the ES of the Higher Attestation Commission

Expert advice	Number of candidates	Number of problem candidates	Number of accompanied dissertations with incorrect borrowing	Number of candidates with their own dissertation with incorrect borrowing	Number of problem publications
	80	33	93	5	28
ES in pedagogy	42	14	32	1	13
ES by right	48	23	25	0	14
	51	12	21	0	2
ES in philosophy, sociology, cultural studies	30	12	18	0	2
ES in psychology	13	3	11	1	1
ES in Political Science	13	4	7	1	3
ES on Management and Informatics	39	5	6	0	0
EC on Agronomy	18	2	6	0	3
ES on history	42	5	5	0	2
ES in Therapeutic Sciences	41	3	4	0	0
ES in engineering and agrotechnical sciences	28	3	4	0	0
ES in Surgical Sciences	34	3	3	0	1
ES in Life Sciences	47	2	3	0	0
ES in zootechnical sciences	22	2	2	0	2
ES in mathematics	30	1	1	0	0
ES in preventive medicine	18	1	1	0	0
ES in Philology and Art Criticism	19	1	0	0	3
ES for construction and architecture	32	1	0	0	1
Total	647	130	242	8	75

If in most of the 19 councils with problem candidates, only a few doctors of sciences were found for whom Dissernet has questions, then in five of them we are talking about dozens of such candidates. These are, first of all, the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission on economics (both councils), law, pedagogy and philosophy. It is in these sciences that the largest number of dissertations with massive incorrect borrowing is registered. In the ES VAK in psychology, only 13 candidates were proposed, therefore, few violators of academic ethics were found. Detailed information about each candidate can be found at the link.

The situation with the expert council on sectoral and regional economics can be called catastrophic. About 40% of candidates (33 out of 80) are involved in supporting dissertations with massive incorrect borrowing, or have an unoriginal dissertation, or have vague ideas about academic ethics, or all together. And taking into account the persons who were published in the "garbage" magazines Scopus, their number reaches 46 (more than 55%). For example, Nailya Gumerovna Bagautdinova from Kazan federal university 27 accompanied by phony theses, according to Dissernet. One of her applicants, Yu.V. Zhiltsova, has already been deprived of her doctorate. economic sciences in April 2017. And if in the dissertation council, in accordance with the new norm, N. G. Bagautdinova cannot sit for 5 years, then there are no such restrictions with regard to the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission.

Among the candidates is also a member of the recently closed dissertation council of Standardinform Alexander Vladimirovich Dokukin. In addition to supporting dissertations with massive incorrect borrowing, it was he who represented S. Kalinovsky and O. Monogarov - plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the Russian Federation challenging the application of a 10-year limitation period to dissertations defended in 2011-2013. In addition, he defends the rights of dissertation candidates to copy well-known truths.

Five candidates for this expert council have signs of unoriginality in their own dissertation: Aleksey Valentinovich Bogoviz, Irina Valerevna Burenina, Georgy Iskanderovich Idrisov, Tatyana Sergeevna Kolmykova, Salima Aleksandrovna Makhosheva.

Other candidates - leaders in supporting dissertations with massive incorrect borrowing - can be judged from Table 2.

Table 2 shows the leaders in the support of fake dissertations with massive incorrect borrowing among candidates for the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission. The table shows that among the candidates there are many representatives of universities and scientific organizations of the southern regions of Russia, primarily from the Caucasus, as well as specialists from agricultural universities and organizations in non-agricultural councils (for example, in the economy, and not in the sectoral one).

table 2
Leading candidates in supporting low-quality dissertations

Candidate	Organization	Expert advice	Number of accompanied substandard dissertations	Personal dissertation with signs of non-originality	Number of problem publications
Bagautdinova Nailya Gumerovna	Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University	ES on sectoral and regional economics	27	0	2
Chervova Albina Alexandrovna	Ivanovsky State University	ES in pedagogy	11	0	0
Kandybovich Sergey Lvovich	Ryazan State University named after S.A. Yesenin	ES in psychology	9	0	1
Dokukin Alexander Vladimirovich	Academy of Standardization, Metrology and Certification	ES on sectoral and regional economics	7	0	2
Galachieva Svetlana Vladimirovna	North Caucasian Mining and Metallurgical Institute (state University of Technology)	ES on sectoral and regional economics	6	0	1
Kharlamov Andrey Viktorovich	Saint Petersburg State University of Economics	ES in Economic Theory, Finance and World Economy	6	0	0
Vartumyan Arushan Arushanovich		ES in Political Science	6	0	0
Kashukoev Murat Vladimirovich	Kabardino-Balkarian State Agrarian University named after V.M. Kokova	EC on Agronomy	6	0	0
Melnikov Alexander Borisovich500	Kuban State Agrarian University named after I.T. Trubilin "	ES on sectoral and regional economics	5	0	0
Makhosheva Salima Alexandrovna	Federal Scientific Center "Kabardino-Balkarian Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences	ES on sectoral and regional economics	4	1	2
Parakhina Valentina Nikolaevna	"North Caucasus Federal University	ES on sectoral and regional economics	4	0	0
Gorlov Sergey Mikhailovich	North Caucasus Federal University	ES in Economic Theory, Finance and World Economy	4	0	0
Bogoudinova Roza Zakirovna	Kazan National Research Technological University	ES in pedagogy	4	0	0
Alexey Bogoviz		ES on sectoral and regional economics	3	1	0
Doroshenko Yuri Anatolievich	Belgorod State Technological University named after V.G. Shukhova	ES on sectoral and regional economics	3	0	0
Lukmanova Inessa Galeevna	National Research Moscow State University of Civil Engineering	ES on sectoral and regional economics	3	0	0
Miller Alexander Emelyanovich	Omsk State University F.M. Dostoevsky	ES on sectoral and regional economics	3	0	7
Avarsky Nabi Dalgatovich (Magomedov Ahmed-Nabi Dalgatovich)	All-Russian Research Institute of Economics Agriculture	ES in Economic Theory, Finance and World Economy	3	0	0

The situation with this expert council is a reflection of the situation in this branch of science. About a third of dissertations (more than 2500) with massive incorrect borrowings, which Dissernet discovered, were defended in the specialty of this expert council 08.00.05 (against 600 fake dissertations defended in other branches of economic science).

Probably, in this branch of science (08.00.05) there are not many professional economists with a good reputation and understanding of the principles of academic ethics who would want to work in the ES VAK. In this case, apparently, it is necessary to talk about reforming both the expert council itself and the entire passport of the specialty, as well as reducing the number of dissertation councils in this specialty (in Russia now every 18th dissertation council awards a degree in specialty 08.00.05).

In the EC for Economic Theory, Finance and the World Economy, the situation is somewhat better than in the neighboring Council for Economics. However, several candidates are of particular concern. Firstly, this is Andrei Viktorovich Kharlamov from the St. Petersburg State University of Economics, who participated in at least 6 defenses of dissertations with massive incorrect borrowing. Secondly, Nabi Dalgatovich Avarsky from the All-Russian Research Institute of Agricultural Economics, who was not known under this name either in Dissernet or among international economists (he is running for the specialty 08.00.14 - World Economy). However, it turned out that until recently ND Avarskiy was published under the name Akhmed-Nabi Dalgatovich Magomedov and sign "Dissernetu" as a participant in three dishonest defenses.

Of particular concern are the publications of candidates for the ES VAK in the journals of the Scopus database. An analysis of the candidates of two ES VAK in economics showed that 27 candidates for ES VAK in sectoral and regional economics and 14 ES VAK in economic theory, finance and the world economy are published in the “garbage” journals Scopus (that is, in those journals that were excluded from the database for lack of, as a rule, independent peer review).

Most of the publications were published in magazines such as International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Asian Social Science, World Applied Sciences Journal, Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Middle East Journal of Scientifc Research, Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, International Business Management, Actual Problems of Economics, Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, Life Science Journal. Thus, N. G. Bagautdinova from Kazan Federal University had 73 such articles for 2012-2016.

Note that KFU is the third organization in Russia in terms of the number of publications in the Scopus database on economics thanks to publications in "garbage" journals. And this year, the university is likely to overtake the Higher School of Economics in this indicator. On the one hand, this, of course, is a consequence of the requirements of the Ministry of Education and Science on publications in international journals... And this requirement is formally fulfilled - through publications for a fee. And the university, in turn, awards those authors who are published in Skopus' journals.

But on the other hand, candidates for the ES VAK from Moscow State University and High school economics are published in solid international journals. This suggests that the leading scientist, who should be present in the ES of the Higher Attestation Commission in accordance with the Regulation on the Expert Council, is unlikely to be published in dubious journals.

Conclusions: The analysis of Dissernet showed that among the candidates for the ES of the Higher Attestation Commission there are persons who have accompanied more than 240 dissertations with massive incorrect borrowings. 8 candidates have their own dissertation with signs of non-originality. It is necessary to reform the composition of the ES of the Higher Attestation Commission and introduce a ban on the participation in it of persons who were related to dishonest defenses as a scientific advisor or opponent.

Cand. econom. Sciences, PhD

Total:0
In contact with 0
Google+ 0
OK 0
Facebook 0

Vak experts on the work of the highest certification commission. Vak experts on the work of the supreme attestation commission Expert councils of the vak rf

POSITION on the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Document overview

POSITION
on the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation