title: Governmentality in British and Russian Higher Education
Creators: name: Abdullayev, Rafig
Publisher: name: University of Glasgow
Year: 2024

description: The focus of this thesis is on how the area of higher education (HE) and people involved in HE – more precisely, students and academics, are disciplined by the governments of two different political settings. By this, I mean how governments use HE to enforce societal and political norms that suit the overarching goals of government. The HE systems of two countries are examined in this respect: the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation. At first glance, it might be possible to claim that the political systems of the mentioned states are considerably different and therefore HE as well as students and academics are also disciplined in different ways. The approach of the UK Government can be described as the one which revolves around neoliberal values, that is, around market-oriented politics, the aim of which is to strengthen the economic welfare of the country. In contrast, the approach the Government of Russia takes can be defined as authoritarian, the key goal of which is to preserve and consolidate the power of the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin. Considering these standpoints, it is reasonable to assert that HE, as well as students and academics, will be disciplined in different ways because of the different routes taken by each government. 

I partially agree with the previous elaboration. However, it is, firstly, necessary to add that Russia has been integrated into the global market economy after the collapse of Soviet Union in 1991. This has left its government with no other choice but to be also market oriented in relation to different spheres including HE so that they can strengthen the economic welfare of their country as well. As such, it seems to be more appropriate to define the Russian political regime as hybrid because of two layers of focus: one authoritarian and one neoliberal. Considering these intricacies, the situation with the disciplining of HE in Russia is more complex than it might appear at first glance and in fact, there are surprising commonalities between the disciplining of HE in Russia and in the UK. Secondly, when attempting to analyse the disciplining of HE in both countries, this thesis avoids looking at it through the judicial exercises of power in both countries. Instead, it utilizes the ideas of Foucault on the operation of power which provides a more nuanced perspective on how control and discipline are non-judicially enforced in both countries’ HE. 

The operation of power can be analysed through the study of top-down judicial practices of both governments to get an understanding of how HE as well as students and academics are disciplined and controlled. The approach of this research, on the other hand, is to study the operation of power in HE of two countries through the ideas of Foucault. According to Foucault we should not understand the operation of power as a solely top-down judicial exercise of governments. Instead, we should be looking at non-judicial discourses and practices that are dispersed by governments and circulate in a society. This thesis examines the non-judicial discourses and practices that are dispersed by both governments in higher education. 

By reconceptualizing the concept of power, Foucault eventually, developed a theory of governmentality. Governmentality is a neoliberal form of governing that aims at producing homo-economicus through the dispersed non-judicial discourses and practices. According to this theory, various discourses and practices are dispersed by governments (technologies of domination as Foucault refers to it) across their societies to direct them towards being market oriented. This leads to a more economically productive society which, as a result, strengthens the economic welfare of the country overall. In other words, governmentality is a disciplining that is directed towards producing homo-economicus. It is necessary to remember that governmentality does not judicially coerce population to become homoeconomicus. It provides them freedom to deviate from the imposed set of discourses and practices – something that is examined by Foucault through the concept of technologies of the self. I examine how governmentality is enacted in HE of Russia and the UK. It becomes evident from this research, that both governments attempt to discipline HE as well as students and academics in accordance with neoliberal values that prioritize market needs. This is more of a case in the UK HE than in the Russian one. However, it is important to state that governmentality exists in the Russian HE as well. This is because with the collapse of Soviet Union in 1991, Russia has been integrated into the global market economy. In this sense, the existence of governmentality in Russian HE is more of an inevitability than a planned way of governing. Along with that, the Russian Government also attempts to discipline HE, and consequently students and academics, with the ideas of Slavophilism that signify the loyalty to the Russian state and aim at consolidating the power of Vladimir Putin allowing him to remain in power for as long as possible. Before mentioning the findings in a more detailed way, it is also necessary to quickly cover the methodology I used in this research. 

As one of the approaches to my methodology (Part 3), I used the critical discourse analysis (CDA) espoused by Fairclough (2007) to analyse the governmental perspectives on higher education in two states. This has been accomplished through the analysis of news articles published by the departments of education in the two countries, covering a period from October 2019 – October 2022. The analysis allowed me to detect the dominant discourses of technologies of domination regarding HE, that is, of governing in relation to higher education. In addition to this, the dominant discourses and practices in HE in both countries have been identified through interviews with university teachers. This allowed me to analyse the individual reflections and conduct (technologies of the self) to the imposed disciplining which is a substantial part of the theory of governmentality. Despite considerable difficulties thirty-two online semi-structured interviews were conducted with lecturers in both countries. However, unfortunately, I was not able to observe the real practices within universities due to the COVID-19 pandemic and then due to the war in Ukraine. This has substantially impacted this research as I could not observe the way power operates in person (explained in Part 3: Methodology). 

As mentioned earlier, the findings reveal that governmentality exists in both countries’ HE. Higher education in the UK is being marketized and commodified. This is also the case with the Russian HE but to a lesser extent. All the identified discourses promoted by the UK Government in relation to HE marketize higher education in the UK. These are: the discourse of students as consumers, STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) subjects and apprenticeship programs. When it comes to the case of the higher education in Russia, there is the discourse of technological entrepreneurship that is directly linked to the marketization of HE in Russia. In addition, according to the interviewed academics in Russia, the Russian Government often demands universities to cooperate with employers and to be market-oriented, especially in relation to the sciences related to STEM subjects. In other words, the Russian Government attempts to connect HE with the market economy, that is, to discipline HE as well as students and academics in accordance with market priorities. Moreover, as they mention there is a growing popularity of corporate universities in Russia which can again be connected to the marketization of HE in Russia. 

Along with this, the Russian Government also disciplines HE, and consequently students and academics, in accordance with the ideas of Slavophilism. This is evident from the discourses of patriotic upbringing, hard sciences as connected to the development of military industry, and student communities. The overall target of Slavophilism is to promote loyalty to the Russian state. The loyalty to the state, in its turn, implies the prioritization of the ideas of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). The key value of ROC that stands out is placing the figure of the ruler of Russia almost at the same level as God and providing him or her with absolute and supreme power. The reason behind such a disciplining is potentially to allow Vladimir Putin to remain in power for as long as possible – one of the key goals of an authoritarian political regime. In fact, the Russian Government seem to reach this aim as there are cases when students record unpatriotic words (as they perceive them) of some lecturers, which can lead to a prosecutor investigation later at the university.

Speaking of the attitudes of students in both countries towards HE, it is possible to claim that they have become passive learners who aim at graduating as soon as possible to get a job afterwards. The interviewed academics in the UK argue that such an approach of students towards HE is the result of marketization of HE by the UK Government which they are unhappy with and try to change through their teaching practices. Along these lines, most of the interviewed academics in the UK often attempt to distance themselves somewhat from teaching practices because of the described attitudes of students towards HE, instead prioritizing research and managerial practices. The interviewed academics in Russia, on the other hand, claim that the passive learning of students in Russia HE is also connected to the visible disciplinary techniques of the Russian Government in relation to HE. They argue that the design (linear set up of desks) of the classrooms in Russian HE initiates a militarized order which breaks down any communication and critical thinking. This leads to the inability to independently analyse information, as described by one of the interviewed academics. Interestingly, despite different approaches to HE by both governments, the result in terms of students’ attitudes towards their studies is often quite similar (in both countries the academics reported that students are passive learners). As such, academics in both countries attempt to change the disciplining of HE through their teaching practices. In other words, both in the UK and in Russian HE, academics attempt to go against the imposed governmental disciplining of HE to a possible degree and as such shift the operation of power. This also indicates that it is indeed possible to speak of the ability to deviate from the imposed governmental disciplining of HE to a certain extent in both countries.

Finally, this research argues that it is not possible to speak of an absolute freedom in the UK HE as there are various practices and discourses that are non-judicially imposed on students and academics that discipline them in specific ways. It is also not possible to speak of an absolute authoritarianism in the Russian HE due to the conduct of academics who can resist governmental disciplining in their teaching practices.