University sports in Russia: comparative progress analysis

ˑ: 

PhD L.K. Tropina 1
PhD, Associate Professor N.B. Serova1
PhD, Associate Professor D.Yu. Narkhov1
1 Ural Federal University, Yekaterinburg

Keywords: university sports, university sports events, student sports club, sports facility, sport discipline, sport group, federal universities, progress analysis

Background. One of the key goals for the academic education system reform in Russia was to establish ten large federal universities in every federal region save for the Central one with the mission to act as flagships for the state education policy goals achievement in every academic education sector including university sports – in view of their colossal social and educational roles of the latter. As far as the national youth policies are concerned, the university sports are also ranked high on the list of priorities of the relevant state agencies as required by the valid federal and departmental legal and regulatory documents [3, 6].

Objective of the study was to analyze the open reports on the academic sports progress in the Russian regional federal universities and rank their progresses in the sports domain.

Methods and structure of the study. We obtained data for the study from the websites of the federal universities, Student Sports Clubs Association of Russia, and study reports with the questionnaire survey data available at the Elibrary.ru. We analyzed the relevant regulatory documents and academic sports progress rating and analyzing methods [4, 5] do develop the following federal universities sports progress rating criteria:

  • numbers of the federal universities sports facilities as per the classifier effectuated by the Ministry of Sports of the Russian Federation Order of February 25, 2016 No. 172;
  • Picked federal university teams competing in the sports events of municipal to international levels;
  • Federal university sport groups available for the students on a permanent basis for theoretical and practical physical education and sport trainings;
  • Sports disciplines the federal university teams are competing at the University Sport Games and other high-ranking university competitions;
  • Federal university picked teams competing in the top-ranking international events;
  • Student sports clubs supported by the federal universities;
  • GTO Complex Test Center at the federal universities;
  • Sports encouragement policies ranking on the federal university list of priority progress policies;
  • Sports section on the federal university website;
  • federal universities sports monitoring and progress reporting and publicizing system.

Results and discussion. Given in Table 1 hereunder are the federal universities sports systems and progress survey data complemented by the federal university student populations and federal university establishment dates to illustrate the federal university system scopes, experiences and popularities nowadays. Note that the first four progress rates are quantifiable and, hence, were particularly important for the federal universities ranking purposes. The other six indicators were rated by “yes” or “no” and, hence, are not precise enough for the ranking purposes albeit still are indicative of the federal university progress in the relevant fields.

The resultant federal universities ranking is given in Table 2. Leading on the list are the Kazan and Siberian federal universities largely due to their hosting of the World Sports Universiades. the Ural, Kazan and Siberian Federal Universities are clearly leading on account of the federal university sport teams. It should be mentioned that no data could be found on this account in the open sources for the North-Eastern and North Caucasian Federal Universities. Leading in the sports group numbers are the Ural and North-Eastern federal universities; although no such data could be obtained for the Northern (Arctic) and Southern Federal Universities. Nine of the ten federal universities report regular qualifications for the University Sports Games and other top-ranking events, with the Ural and Northern Federal Universities holding the leading positions on this account.

Presently every federal university has its sports teams competing at the high ranking international events – that mean that they all give a high priority to elite sports; and every federal university reports supporting the university sports clubs. The Ural, Siberian and North-Eastern federal universities reported the university sports clubs being formalized in their departmental system, whilst the other federal universities support them as self-governing non-profit student associations, with the exception of the Crimean Federal University that supports its sports clubs in both formats.

Table 1. Academic sports progress statistics reported by the federal universities as of September 2019

Indicators

Ural

Baltic

Far Eastern

Kazan

Crimean

Northern

North-Eastern

North Caucasian

Siberian

Southern

Founding date

2009

2010

2009

2010

2014

2010

2009

2012

2006

2006

Students, thousand

57,0

10,5

23,0

27,5

34,4

26,8

10,9

28,0

31,0

33,0

Sport facilities

28

17

35

55

38

11

17

12

40

27

Picked teams

31

17

16

29

8

11

ND

ND

27

6

Sports groups

30

16

17

23

14

ND

27

9

24

ND

Sports at University Games

18

10

10

13

ND

17

9

7

13

11

Competing at top-ranking international events

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

Sports club(s)

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

GTO Complex Test Center

+

+

Sports in the federal university progress policies

+

+

+

+

Sports on the federal university website

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

Sports progress monitoring/ reporting system

+

Note: * ND – no data

Only two federal universities reported having the GTO Complex Test Centers. And only four universities (Ural, Baltic, North Eastern and Siberian Federal Universities) reported listing the sports promotion polices in their priority progress programs – that means that the other federal universities seem to underestimate the importance of academic sports and their contributions to the academic human resource.

Table 2. Federal University rankings on the key sports progress accounts

Accounts

Ural

Baltic

Far Eastern

Kazan

Crimean

Northern

North-Eastern

North Caucasian

Siberian

Southern

Sports facilities

5

7-8

4

1

3

10

7-8

9

2

6

Picked sports teams

1

4

5

2

7

6

-

-

3

8

Sports groups

1

6

5

4

7

-

2

8

3

-

Sports at University Games

1

6-7

6-7

3-4

-

2

8

9

3-4

5

Furthermore, two federal universities were found not to run any sports section on their university websites – that may be interpreted as indicative of the underestimation of the public awareness and sports promotion policies for ensuring the human resource inflow and health initiatives. We also found some of the Federal University Sports sections on the websites giving incomplete, outdated or irrelevant information on the university sports, or the coverage was inconsistent, or the necessary information is difficult for access.

It has become common for the last two years to find the university research reports on the websites of the institutes reporting to the federal universities. More often than not these publications brief readers on findings of the scientific reports and/ or lists of the research publications by the institutes. No such publications could be found on websites of three federal universities; and one federal university was found to keep classified access to these data. In addition, we found only the Ural Federal University to openly publish findings of the university physical education and sports progress reports [see, e.g.: 1], and this shortage of open information seriously limits the opportunities for comparative progress analysis in the attempts to understand the current federal university sports progress situation in the country.

Our analysis also found significant differences in the federal university sports assets. Unsurprisingly leading on this account are the universities that have hosted the World Student Universiades. It should be also noted that a leadership in the sport assets is not always associated with a leadership in the numbers of sports groups, university sports teams competing at the University Sports Games and numbers of picked teams – that may be due to the shortages of the managerial and material resources. It was also found that not every federal university management ranks high the university sports on the lists of priority federal university progress policies, and they are often kept beyond such policy priorities.

Presently every federal university maintains at least one university sports club, although most of the universities are still in need of a GTO Complex Test Center; and the university sports coverage on the websites of most of the federal universities was found insufficient, outdated and unsatisfactory. We also found that the federal university (like all other universities) are still in need of a well-grounded academic physical education and sports monitoring and progress reporting system as acknowledged both by the university management and academic sports researchers. Such system may be designed with application of the progress rating criteria being used for the monitoring purposes by some other constituents of the Russian Federation [2].

Conclusion. The Russian federal universities demonstrate a great potential for the national policy goals in the competitive human resource production and promotion, with a special priority to the students’ healthy lifestyles and university sports. The federal university sports comparative progress analysis and findings reported herein may help the policy makers find the most promising avenues for the academic sports progress and effectively address the current problems faced by the system.

References

  1. Dobrynin I.M., Narkhov D.Yu., Narkhova E.N., Rusova P.V. Physical education as discipline and life-style in view of modern students. Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. Lobachevskogo, seriya «Sot-sialnye nauki». 2016. No. 2. pp. 17-22.
  2. Karpov V.Yu., Kudinova V.A., Seselkin A.I., Bakulina E.D. Monitoring of efficiency of development of physical culture and sport in federal subjects of Russia. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury. 2016. No. 3. pp. 56-58.
  3. The concept of development of student sports in the Russian Federation for the period until 2025. Approved by order of the Ministry of Sports of Russia dated November 21, 2017 No. 1007].
  4.  Kuz'min M.A., Zinov'ev N.A., Svyatchenko P.B. University sports development in Russia. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2016, no. 10, pp. 60–61.
  5. Lubysheva L.I., Peshkova N.V. Analysis of Development of University Sport: State and Perspectives. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2014, no. 1, 39 p.
  6. Fundamentals of the state youth policy of the Russian Federation for the period until 2025. Approved by order of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 29, 2014 No. 2403-p.

Corresponding author: lktr@mail.ru

Abstract

Objective of the study was to analyze the open reports on the academic sports progress in the Russian regional federal universities and rank their progresses in the sports domain.

Methods and structure of the study. The authors obtained data for the study from the websites of the federal universities, Student Sports Clubs Association of Russia, and study reports with the questionnaire survey data available at the Elibrary.ru. The relevant regulatory documents and academic sports progress rating and analyzing methods were analyzed.

 Study results and conclusions. The analysis revealed that different universities have significantly different sports infrastructures. Universities that have hosted World Universiades are greatly ahead in terms of this indicator. It was found that not all federal universities consider the development of sports as an important direction of their development in general and do not include activities for the development of sports within the existing development programs. Currently, all federal universities have sports clubs, but most of them do not have any centers for testing the GTO Complex. In most universities, the quality of informational support for the promotion of sports through the university's website can be assessed as insufficient or unsatisfactory.
The comparative analysis of the positions of federal universities in the field of sports aims to identify the vectors of development and stimulate the search for effective solutions to the existing problems.