IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nos/voprob/2012i4p200-212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Distance Learning in Professional Higher Education: Characteristics of Students

Author

Abstract

Based on the data obtained in the MEMO ProjectLyudmila Ugolnova, Deputy Head of the Data Processing Department, Center for Institutional Studies, National Research University - Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation. Email: lugolnova@hse.ru The situation in distance higher education in Russia is described using statistical data and results of the polls conducted among students of professional higher education institutions and employers as part of the MEMO Project (Monitoring of Education Markets and Organizations).The number of distance students in HE institutions has more than doubled over the last decade, making distance learning the most popular way of getting professional higher education. The paper shows how students are distributed among different forms of learning in public and private HE institutions. The proportion of distance students has been increasing, while the proportion of full-time and part-time students has been naturally decreasing in both private and public institutions, although to a lesser extent in the latter.The author specifies the differences between full-time and distance students in terms of their social and demographic status, educational and career strategies. She also explains the motivation for choosing distance learning. The paper investigates how full-time and distance students assess their chances of working in their field of study.A survey among employers has shown that full-time students have a certain advantage when applying for a job after graduation. Preferences of employers in hiring graduates and undergraduates are also presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Liudmila Ugolnova, 2012. "Distance Learning in Professional Higher Education: Characteristics of Students," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 200-212.
    • Handle: RePEc:nos:voprob:2012:i:4:p:200-212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nos:voprob:2012:i:4:p:200-212. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marta Morozova (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://vo.hse.ru/en/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.