Search

The monograph reveals the history of formation of the sources of law governing state supervision of quality of education, defining the mechanism of legal regulation of the Federal state quality control of education and the practice of law in this area currently. It is intended for employees of educational organizations, teachers, postgraduates, law students.

In accordance with the Federal Law No. 294-FZ of 26.12.2008 “On the Defense of the Rights of Legal Entities and Individual Entrepreneurs in the Conduct of State Control (Supervision) and Municipal Control”, annually the government oversight(supervision) authorities, the bodies of municipal control in accordance with the procedure established by the Government of the Russian Federation, prepare reports on the eff ectiveness of their activities. At the same time, the legislator did not formulate the defi nition of “eff ective control (supervision)”, and effi ciency reports are based primarily on quantitative indicators (information on state (municipal) employees, the number of inspections, the size of fi nes, a list of violations detected and prosecuted persons, information on Judicial decisions, otherwise). The authors of the article, analyzing the normative legal acts, studied the practice of conducting inspections in the sphere of education of Moscow and other subjects of the Russian Federation, set forth a scientifi c view on the effi ciency of control and supervision activity, propose a model, as well as indicators for assessing the eff ectiveness of inspections in education.

In the Russian Federation verifi cations in the fi eld of education are carried out by the authorized authorities and in the manner prescribed by law. The main legal acts in the fi eld of control and surveillance activities are the Federal Law “On Education in the Russian Federation”, Federal Law “On protection of rights of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs in the exercise of state control (supervision) and municipal control” and the Federal Law “On licensing of certain activities”. The head of the audited educational organization in order to enhance their legal awareness when dealing with the inspectors must be aware of their rights, obligations and the measures taken in the case of violations of the law. The article describes and comments on the organizational and legal aspects of inspections of educational institutions and organizations engaged in training.

Federal law of 31.12.2014 № 500-FZ “On Amending Parts of Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation» has significantly changed State regulation of education in the frame of Federal law of 29.12.2012 № 273-FZ “On Education in the Russian Federation”. Federal law of 29.12.2012 № 273-FZ “On Education in the Russian Federation” has been amended to optimize the following procedures: – State accreditation of educational activity; – System of actions taken by education control and supervision organs towards educational institutions, bodies of state power of the subjects of the Russian Federation conducting governmental management of education, bodies of local self-government conductingmanagement of educationbased on the results of inspection of federal government oversight of education and federal government control of education quality; – Distribution and control figures of admission for professions, programs, majors and (or) groups of professions, programs, majors. The article explicitly generalizes, explains and comments on questions coming from the bodies of state power of the subjects of the Russian Federation exercising the authority of state control (supervision) of education. The author covers procedural issues of control and supervision as a matter of education legislation effective since 11.12.2015. Article consists of detailed answers to questions.

According to the Federal Law of December 29, 2012 № 273-FL «On Education in the Russian Federation» new procedures to regulate educational activities arranging and conducting in accordance with educational programs of various levels and/or of various purposes or on correspondent type of education, which are to be adopted by orders of the RF Ministry of Education and Science (hereinafter referred to as «procedures»), have come into effect as from September 1, 2013. Standard provisions, which earlier regulated arranging and conducting educational activities by educational institutions of various types and kinds, and the whole specter of other activities of these institutions, are gradually losing force. When implementing new procedures, bodies of the RF executive authorities and local authorities, responsible for control and administration in the sphere of education, as well as educational institutions and participants of educational relations may encounter considerable difficulties. The author’s papers provide exhaustible and detailed answers to any questions, which may arose when implementing new procedures in the educational sphere.

Present-day social sphere of the Russian Federation employs over 14.4 million workers; the majority (about 5.2 mln) are occupied in the educational sphere and another 3.9 mln — in the spheres of public health and social services. Remuneration of labor system for those occupied in state federal institutions is established based on the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation №583 as of 5th August of 2008. Introduction of the new system has had a positive affect on the dynamics in government (municipal) employees’ compensation. Still, as the evidence shows, even the new system of remuneration fails to solve the problem of performance-contingent motivation for all categories of institutions. Ii is observed that in many cases performance indicators and criteria are not properly developed and are applied as a mere formality. In many public institutions incentive rewards are paid as a guaranteed part of compensation without any relation to the results of work. This is largely due to the extremely low tariff rates at the public institutions and their low competitiveness at local labor markets. As a result public institutions have to reward workers regardless of their performance results to retain manpower. The author concludes that remuneration of labor systems should be adapted to new conditions, aimed at the growth of appropriate industries, increase of services quality and maintain contingency between the public servants’ performance results and their compensation.