Low scores on the exam. How many points did you pass the exam and what university did you enter? What is a passing score

The passing score is a variable value. Its value is strongly influenced by the number of universities with a similar quality of education, as well as the number of applicants.

You will need

- admission committee of the university, information on how many applicants with good USE results;
- statistics.

Instruction

In order to have a clear idea of the magnitude passing score, it is worth waiting for the deadline for accepting documents, and based on the data received, find out how many points you need to have in order to be a student. But due to using USE results, this number may decrease, for example, if someone takes their documents to another university.

If there is no wait for the mood and patience, you can use the following scheme. To get started, find out the statistics of passing scores in this educational institution for recent years 3-4. Further study the resulting numbers. On average, the passing score fluctuates by 5-10 points annually.

Of course, the chances of getting into the passing score for graduates with perfect USE results increase. However, it is this contingent that can significantly increase the value of the passing score.

Where is it realistic / unrealistic to enter on the budget?

The average USE score of those admitted to the budget will vary greatly depending on which university they enter.

As a rule, the highest gates USE scores/OGE for admission to the budget in the most prestigious universities in the country: St. Petersburg State University, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Moscow State University, MGIMO, Higher School of Economics, etc. To get here, you will have to score at least 90 points.

But applicants with a passing score of 80 may well qualify for a place in almost any other university. True, the minimum USE score for admission to the budget in each case must be found out separately, because it may depend not only on the university itself, but also on the specialty you are applying for.

From 60 to 80 - these are the points needed for admission to the budget in public educational institutions that are not related to the top, but nevertheless provide very high level education for their students.

Another point that is important to pay attention to when raising the question of whether it is difficult to enter the budget is which city you are going to enter. Of course, the larger the city, the greater the competition. And this means that the requirements for the number (sum) of USE scores for admission to the budget will be higher than for less popular cities.

Is it difficult to enter the budget: requirements for different specialties

Choosing a university is not everything. To enter the budget, it is important to take into account not only the passing scores in a particular university, but also in a particular specialty.
By the way! For our readers there is now a 10% discount on

And now, so that you can navigate and accurately calculate what chances you have to enter the budget, let's look at the main areas and begin to soberly assess our own strengths so as not to waste time.

The “coolest” specialties: from 75 points

So, here are the specialties and directions, without scoring at least 75 points, you can consider that you didn’t enter (what to do - we’ll say later):

Foreign languages;
International relationships;
Oriental and African studies;
Linguistics.

Typically, the average score in these areas can vary between 80-82 points.

A little less (75-80 points) will be needed for other equally popular destinations:

Philology,
Jurisprudence,
Political science,
Economy,
Literary creativity,
art theory,
Journalism,
Advertising and PR.

Directions of average "coolness": 70-75 points

What to do to enter the budget for specialties related to medicine, philosophy, nuclear physics or public services? You will have to score from 70 to 75 points.

Here is a list of areas that require an average of this number of points:

healthcare,
Nuclear physics,
Municipal and state administration,
Information security and business informatics,
Publishing,
Story,
Design,
Cultural studies and philosophy.

Standard directions: 65-70 points

If you are often tormented by the thought “I’m afraid not to enter the budget!” - relax! There are always specialties that are easy to enter, and then it is not difficult to study. Another thing is that you can’t build a special career later, but this is already the tenth thing.

So, here are the most massive areas, for admission to which you will have to score 65-70 points:

Pedagogy,
Management and personnel management,
Tourism, service, hospitality (service sector in general),
Psychology,
Chemistry,
Biotechnology,
Sociology,
religious studies,
Librarianship and archives.

Availability of exact sciences: 60-65 points

What are the chances of getting into the budget? Much more if you are a "techie" mindset, not a humanist

Construction, engineering, geology and other exact sciences (natural sciences and physical and mathematical) require a great mind, but, oddly enough, a smaller number of passing marks.

Here you can easily enter the budget in one of the following areas:

Biology and Ecology,
Physics,
Mathematics,
Construction,
Geodesy, geology, geography,
Space technology and aviation,
Computing and Informatics,
Automation and control,
Energy,
Oil and gas business,
Radio and electrical engineering.

Easier than simple: up to 60 points

If you did not manage to score more than 60 points, do not be discouraged - the fields of technology, transport and agriculture and the following areas are always open to you:

railway transport,
water transport management,
light industry and technology,
food industry and technology,
Materials Science,
engineering,
soil science,
printing and packaging,
agriculture and fisheries.

Why get upset? In these areas, you (unlike many others) will be able to get real practical skills close to production. And despite the fact that such specialties do not shine with prestige, young specialists from such universities are always in demand and will always get a job, unlike newly minted philologists and art historians.

And the most NOT in demand among young people are the following specialties:

metallurgy,
forestry,
marine technology.

To become a state employee of these specialties, 52-55 points will be enough.

In any case, you will first have to find out the number of required passing points, so as not to waste time and enter where you can go, taking into account the points you have scored. This can be done by analyzing the last year's situation. Usually this information doesn't change much over the course of a couple of years, so based on last year's entries, you'll get a pretty good picture of what's in store for you.

You can find out the number of passing points from previous years on the websites of selected educational institutions. Usually there is an item " Selection committee”, where average statistical data are published.

However, even a low passing score does not prevent you from striving to recruit more points. So try to be smart about it. And so that nothing distracts you from preparation (with a tutor, from lessons, self-study), contact us - you will be freed from the need to complete an urgent test, write an essay or even take an exam at school!

And as a bonus - a short video with tips from an experienced person:

Hello, dear readers of the blog site. USE exams long gone, everyone already knows how many points they managed to score, and for some applicants, the question arose in full growthsmall scores on the exam what to do? I must say right away that I am kind today and therefore I will not send everyone, depending on gender, to the army or to the cleaners of the entrances. No, I hope that you will get (or have already received) what you deserve from your parents and now you really want to enter a university and study well there. The article will be divided into 2 subparagraphs, I hope that both will be interesting, if not, then read at least one, do not immediately close the tab in the browser.

Small points on the exam, what to do

No need to freak out, now everything will be decided

Perhaps I will divide this item into 2, for guys and for girls. Although, perhaps this is superfluous and the guys have now become too feminine, and the girls are too self-confident. But I hope that this is not the case, and yet everything is fine among young people, even in the capitals.

So, dear girls, I hasten to write words of consolation for you. If you scored very few USE points and now you cannot get into the budget for the specialty and the university that you dreamed about, then this is not a sentence. Therefore, wipe away the tears, they will not help the cause anyway, and proceed to the next subparagraph of the article.

Young people, I'm afraid that you, having received little at the exam and a lot at home, decided that now you need to calm down and it's best to do this in the company of friends and alcohol. Health, of course, is yours, but it makes no sense to waste it from the word at all. It is better to gather your will into a fist, read the next subparagraph and enter the university.

Where to do with small scores on the exam

I didn’t come up with anything too new, but I’ll put together everything that I wrote about earlier. So, let's begin:

To begin with, try to moderate your desires and take a sober look at your capabilities. If the USE scores are not enough to enter the most pretentious university in the city, then to hell with it, enter the university easier, when applying for a job this will play a very weak role.

Further, . In my opinion, it has solid advantages. And it's easier to enter, and you will be given a place to work, isn't that wonderful? More details can be found at the link at the beginning of the paragraph.

Another option is to apply for . For more details, follow the link, here I’ll just say that it’s easier to do than on full-time department, and it's easier to learn, so think about it. In addition, you will gain experience during your studies, which will be so useful when .

The last option would be large university. The advantages are the same as in other study options - it is easier to enter and study, so think about it, maybe someone will go from big city to a smaller city, where there are branches of universities, and someone will remain in their native small town and will not go to storm the metropolis.

Summing up, I’ll say that small USE scores are not a sentence, there is always something to do with small USE scores. See you on the blog pages site

If the article seemed useful to you, please share it with your friends using the buttons below.

If you have any questions, write in the comments, I will try to answer as detailed and clear as possible or just chat.

Research on the quality of reception in Russian universities NRU " graduate School Economy” and the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia together with the International Information Agency “Russia Today” have been holding for five years, since 2011. The study is based on the analysis of information presented on the websites of higher educational institutions, which is compared with the data of higher education institutions' reports to the Ministry of Education and Science. If necessary, data are verified with the admissions committees of universities.

The results of the study (often referred to as monitoring the quality of admission) are widely used primarily by applicants who make decisions about choosing a university and educational program, as well as by the universities themselves to analyze their position in the market higher education. The Ministry of Education and Science of Russia and the leadership of the Russian regions rely on the results of monitoring when evaluating the work of universities and developing educational policy.

By tradition, the first part of the study is the results of enrollment in budget places— Presented by the Minister of Education and Science of Russia and the Rector of the Higher School of Economics in early September. In October, the second part of the study is published, which includes an analysis of paid admissions (number of enrolled, GPA and cost of education), as well as its comparison with the quality and size of the budget set.

Monitoring includes only full-time education, as well as only those universities, admission to which is determined by the USE competition and Olympiads. Creative universities and universities of law enforcement agencies do not participate in the monitoring.

General Observations

The average USE scores of those enrolled in state-funded places are, as a rule, 5-6 points higher than the average USE scores of those enrolled in paid places - this ratio has been maintained throughout the monitoring.
In terms of the total number of applicants for the 1st year, the budget enrollment is approximately twice as high as the paid enrollment.

Rice. 1. Average USE scores of those enrolled in state-funded and paid places and the total number of first-year students, 2011-2016

	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
average score of the Unified State Examination enrolled in state-funded places	63,6	63,5	67,2	64,3	65,7	66,6
enrolled in budget places, pers.	286 621	302 656	299 822	281 583	288 154	275 566
average USE score enrolled in paid places	57,5	56,6	61,9	57,3	60,3	60,8
enrolled in paid places, pers.	99 131	151 581	158 335	148 393	136 386	154 293

Most applicants enter classical universities and technical universities.

Rice. 2. Distribution of first-year students by universities of different profiles, 2016

In general, in Russia, the highest average USE scores of applicants are demonstrated by medical schools. There are more weak applicants in technical, pedagogical and agricultural universities.

Rice. 3. Average USE scores enrolled in state-funded and paid places, for universities of different profiles, 2011-2015

Table 1. Top 20 universities with the highest average USE scores among those enrolled in state-funded places, 2011-2015

Popular areas of training

The extent to which a particular profession is attractive in the eyes of applicants and their families can be indirectly assessed by comparing 1) the shares of winners and prize-winners of Olympiads among those enrolled in different areas of training (since this group of applicants is the most free in choosing a university) and 2) the shares enrolled in paid places (since this group of applicants chooses where to invest their own funds).

The “International Relations” direction remains the absolute leader: the share of “Olympiads” in it reaches 13% (and this is the largest share among all the directions), and those enrolled in paid places make up three quarters of the entire enrollment.

In general, in terms of the share of paid admission, social and humanitarian areas of training are noticeably ahead of technical ones.

Table 2. Groups of study areas with the largest (more than 70%) and smallest (less than 5%) paid enrollment

	Direction group	Total enrolled in 2015, people	Of them enrolled in paid places, %
big		3973	77,9
	Economy	35526	77,7
	International relationships	4063	77,4
		6339	76,7
	Jurisprudence	23129	73,1
small		3782	4,8
	Agriculture and fisheries	16656	4,7
	Technological machines and equipment	7578	4,6
	Geography	2319	4,4
		9429	4,4
	Water transport management	1050	3,9
	Printing and packaging	332	3,6
	forestry	3067	3,4
	Light industry technologies	807	2,4
	Armament	719	1,9
	Metallurgy	1492	1,9
	materials	1839	1,5
	Marine technology	1772	1,4
	soil science	297	1,0

Preferential categories of applicants choose the same areas of training for themselves: their share is largest (from 7 to 8.5%) in the areas of "State and municipal administration", "Economics", "Jurisprudence", "Advertising and public relations", "International Relations", "Management".

Table 3 Directions of training, among those enrolled in which the share of applicants with special rights exceeds 7%, 2015

In terms of the proportion of Olympiads, the composition of the leading areas is less homogeneous: along with the humanities, physics, mathematics, and chemistry occupy prominent positions.

Table 4. Directions of training, among enrolled in which the share of winners and prize-winners of Olympiads exceeds 4%, 2015

Direction group		Share of Olympiads, %
International relationships	4063	13,38
Physics	5240	7,28
Oriental and African studies	1310	6,85
art theory	438	6,67
Design	2801	6,48
	7735	5,35
Advertising and public relations	3973	5,01
Mathematics	10463	4,93
Nuclear Physics and Technology	1201	4,59
Economy	35526	4,51
Chemistry	3144	4,25

The needs of enterprises and organizations, regional and municipal authorities, expressed in the profile target set, focus on the basic professions for society: doctors, teachers, lawyers and techies-specialists in the field of transport.

Table 5 Directions of training, among those enrolled in which the share of "targeted students" exceeds 15%, 2015

Direction group	Enrolled in budget and paid places total, pers.	Share of "targeted customers", %
healthcare	41310	50,12
Aviation and rocket and space technology	3782	44,59
Aviation systems (operation)	1712	28,90
Armament	719	23,26
Vehicles	13315	21,86
Electronic engineering, radio engineering and communication	9429	19,59
Jurisprudence	23129	19,44
Teacher Education	27978	16,78
Oil and gas business	3194	16,47
mechanical engineering	2286	16,22
Marine technology	1772	15,28

Strengths and weaknesses of training

university	2015 (place in the ranking)	2014 (place in the ranking)	2013 (place in the ranking)	2012 (place in the ranking)	2011 (place in the ranking)	Credited to the 2015 budget	Average USE score (budget) 2015	Credited to the 2014 budget	Average USE score (budget) 2014	Credited to the 2013 budget	Average USE score (budget) 2013	Credited to the 2012 budget	Average USE score (budget) 2012	Credited to the 2011 budget	Average USE score (budget) 2011
St. Petersburg Academic University - Research and Educational Center for Nanotechnologies of the Russian Academy of Sciences	1					59	95,5
	2	1	1	1	1	436	94,7	416	93,8	450	96,5	463	93,7	448	93,7
	3	2	3	3	3	890	93,8	926	92,7	944	93,6	867	91,2	854	90
	4	3	2	2	2	1989	91,5	1873	91,4	2102	94,2	1596	93,4	1721	90
	5	9	4	6	8	208	89,4	187	85,5	185	90,6	171	86,8	175	84,4
	6	4	7	9	9	2340	88,1	2365	88	2640	89	2915	84,2	2887	82,6
	7	7	6	7	7	3848	87,1	3919	86,3	3998	89,3	3829	86,6	3912	85,6
	8	10	16	37	36	475	86,3	607	84,8	865	85	1249	77,2	1215	76,9
Russian Academy National economy and public service under the President of the Russian Federation, Moscow	9	8	17	11	13	611	85,6	640	86	575	85	561	83,3	511	81,1
State Institute of the Russian Language. A.S. Pushkin, Moscow	10	11	8	8	5	75	85,6	46	83,5	42	87,6	42	85,7	40	89
	11	15	21	14	34	529	84,6	621	82,8	697	84,4	444	82	474	77,8
Samara State the University of Economics	12	28	67	65	50	204	84	212	79,2	259	77,9	219	74,3	218	75,1
	13	5	5	12	19	620	83,2	565	87,8	592	90,1	573	82,9	592	80,7
	14	6	9	4	4	1034	83	1032	87,3	1398	87,4	628	91,1	582	89,4
St. Petersburg National research university information technologies, mechanics and optics	15	12	26	15	20	1122	82,7	1173	83	1282	83,6	1372	81,9	1377	80,2
Nizhny Novgorod State Linguistic University them. ON THE. Dobrolyubova	16	19	14	13	25	177	82,7	181	80,7	167	85,3	167	82,5	169	79,1
	17	18	13	29	29	576	82,6	449	81	540	85,3	510	79,2	554	78,5
St. Petersburg State University of Technology and Design	18	34	48	49	71	481	82,5	441	78	385	80,9	409	75,7	500	72,5
Russian Academy of Justice, Moscow	19	20	20	5	6	83	82,5	91	80,4	102	84,5	87	87,8	78	86
	20	14	11	10	17	866	82,3	1142	82,8	1146	85,6	926	83,3	850	80,9

	21	16	12	20	10	943	82	930	82,7	895	85,4	791	81,3	760	82
First State Moscow medical University them. THEM. Sechenov	22	25	10	26	16	1262	81,8	1392	79,6	1351	86,1	1084	80,2	990	80,9
	24	13	28	27	58	1341	81,2	1024	83	1056	83,3	932	79,7	1084	74,2
St. Petersburg State Pediatric Medical University	25	24	24	18	21	430	81	455	79,7	445	83,7	445	81,5	439	80
	30	31	15	17	14	425	80	420	78,5	366	85,1	375	81,9	392	81,1
Saint Petersburg State University of Economics	31	42	40	25	18	772	79,7	1035	76,7	696	81,5	702	80,4	678	80,9
	36	17	18	31	15	367	79,3	359	81,4	345	85	341	78,5	334	81,1
Moscow State Technical University them. N.E. Bauman	42	52	27	22	11	3088	78,5	2968	75,5	2824	83,3	2520	81,1	2756	81,3
Literary Institute. A.M. Gorky, Moscow	49	21	33	19	22	91	77,5	91	80	82	82,6	71	81,4	71	79,5
	58	26	19	34	12	635	75,8	592	79,4	452	84,7	474	77,9	350	81,3
Dagestan State Medical Academy, Makhachkala	131	94	29	16	23	485	69,9	486	71,2	485	83	467	81,9	484	79,4

Table 9 TOP-20 universities in terms of the quality of paid admission (2011-2015)

university	2015 (place in the ranking)	2014 (place in the ranking)	2013 (place in the ranking)	2012 (place in the ranking)	2011 (place in the ranking)	Enrolled in paid places 2015	Average score of the Unified State Examination enrolled in paid places 2015	Enrolled in paid places 2014	Average score of the Unified State Examination enrolled in paid places 2014	Enrolled in paid places 2013	Average score of the Unified State Examination enrolled in paid places 2013	Enrolled in paid places 2012	Average score of the Unified State Examination enrolled in paid places 2012	Enrolled in paid places 2011	Average score of the Unified State Examination enrolled in paid places 2011
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology	1	2	3	3	4	149	82,5	74	78,9	119	80,9	113	77,7	60	76,1
Moscow state institute international relations	2	1	1	1	3	645	81,3	716	78,9	748	84,9	597	79,4	538	78,8
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow	3	3	2	2	5	1965	79,3	914	77,8	1577	81,1	1145	77,9	889	75,8
Saint Petersburg State University	4	5	9	13	13	774	77,3	890	75	1266	76,3	1298	69	972	68,1
National Research Nuclear University "MEPhI", Moscow	5	9	32	53	62	305	76	66	71,8	353	69,7	340	61,7	251	60,8
Moscow State University M.V. Lomonosov	6	6	4	4	6	1807	74,3	1431	72,4	1352	78,3	1450	73,5	1339	72,7
National Research University Higher School of Economics, branch, St. Petersburg	7	8	14	12	19	498	74,3	300	72	108	73,7	88	69,1	51	66,3
First St. Petersburg State Medical University named after I.I. I.P. Pavlova	8	7	6	6	33	415	72,6	253	72,2	345	77,6	195	71,9	222	63,3
All-Russian Academy of Foreign Trade, Moscow	9	12	8	10	20	347	72,5	373	69,1	362	76,5	371	69,2	227	66,2
Moscow Institute of Electronics and Mathematics, National Research University Higher School of Economics	10	10	17	28	91	63	71,1	12	70,4	35	72,8	28	64,6	24	58,2
Russian National Research Medical University. N.I. Pirogov, Moscow	11	60	45	42	72	533	70,7	367	61,6	623	67,7	481	62,7	214	59,3
Moscow Architectural Institute (State Academy)	12		113	101	161	134	70,6			129	62,5	98	57,4	97	55,5
Russian Economic University. G.V. Plekhanov, Moscow	13	34	37	39	30	705	70,4	1445	63,9	1211	69,3	955	62,9	725	63,4
Novosibirsk National Research State University	14	11	28	19	311	501	70,4	557	69,5	605	71	705	66,2
Moscow State Law University. O.E. Kutafina	15	26	20	22	32	269	70,2	406	65,8	498	71,9	420	65,2	327	63,3
Kazan State Medical University	16	15	12	7	41	405	69,9	266	68,2	371	74,3	152	71,3	268	62,4
Tver State Medical University	17	29	15	21	46	180	69,9	166	64,3	190	73,7	188	65,6	144	62
National Research University Higher School of Economics, branch, Nizhny Novgorod	18	18	22	57	29	58	69,9	57	67,5	146	71,5	91	61,4	103	63,8
Russian Customs Academy, Lyubertsy	19	99	67	37	45	168	69,3	236	59,3	249	66	193	63,4	96	62,1
Kuban State Medical University, Krasnodar	20	22	16	16	12	562	69,1	588	66,8	650	73,5	530	67,3	319	68,4
universities included in the Top 20 in 2011-2014
Moscow State Linguistic University	22	4	11	11	15	198	68,9	18	75,2	110	74,6	206	69,1	91	67,5
South Federal University	26	20	31	96	75	187	68	45	67,4	310	70	1026	58	276	59
Ural State Medical University, Yekaterinburg	28	49	21	18	84	270	67,6	286	62,8	292	71,9	261	66,5	279	58,6
St. Petersburg State University of Aerospace Instrumentation	29	62	76	103	11	596	67,2	683	61,4	592	64,7	547	57,3	375	69
Voronezh State Medical University named after V.I. N.N. Burdenko	30	13	10	8	8	382	67,1	368	68,8	398	75,6	449	69,3	542	70,5
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow	32	19	29	9	10	1301	66,8	985	67,4	785	70,5	545	69,3	532	69,2
Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry	43	14	19	334	7	400	65,8	531	68,4	542	71,9			92	72,4
Izhevsk State Medical Academy	58	40	50	66	2	171	64	110	63,5	141	67,1	183	60,1	146	79,3
Rostov State Medical University	62	46	5	5	21	463	63,6	328	63	245	77,7	190	72,5	169	65,7
Moscow State University of Printing Arts	72	41	18	20	53	472	62,6	260	63,3	256	72,1	249	66,1	249	61,4
Moscow State Humanities University them. M.A. Sholokhov	78	16	70	71	51	108	62,5	111	68,1	190	65,8	344	59,8	80	61,5
St. Petersburg State Technological Institute (Technical University)	85	17	251	221	288	428	62,1	226	68	1003	57,1	845	53,3	510
Russian State University of Oil and Gas THEM. Gubkin, Moscow	87	63	47	26	16	466	62	556	61,4	559	67,5	527	64,7	402	66,9
South Russian Institute of Management - branch of the RANEPA, Rostov-on-Don	112	78	65	51	17	322	61,2	369	60,5	371	66	357	61,9	371	66,9
North Ossetian State Medical Academy, Vladikavkaz	118	58	7	14	1	88	61	89	61,8	127	76,6	97	67,8	99	81,5
Stavropol State Medical University	119	108	13	17	14	321	60,8	338	59	335	74,1	318	66,5	253	67,9
Ural Institute of Management - branch of RANEPA, Yekaterinburg	131	112	30	15	22	295	60,1	103	58,8	72	70,5	90	67,8	23	65,6
Samara State Medical University	134	27	41	33	9	265	60	240	64,6	206	68,4	278	63,8	255	69,9
Togliatti State University	173	158	239	267	18	466	58,1	494	56,2	505	57,5	515	51,8	439	66,8

Structure of training and paid admission

Five groups of directions can be distinguished according to the ratio of paid and budgetary admission of students.

First group, the most numerous (28 destinations out of 66) - paid admission is negligible, less than 10% of the budget. Including this group includes six out of ten directions with the largest budget reception: “ Agriculture”, “transport”, “energy”, “mathematics”, “electronics” and “ecology”. The fact that there are practically no paid students in these areas reflects, first of all, the traditional “overproduction” of personnel in state-funded places.

Second group- there is a paid reception, but it is small: from 10 to 35% of the budget. There are 11 such directions out of 66, the largest ones are “pedagogy” and “construction”. As a rule, applicants in these areas consider their future employment prospects as good, but do not count on a quick career.

Third group- paid admission from 36 to 80% of the budget, approximately corresponds to the share of paid admission in the higher education system as a whole. This, one might say, is the optimal combination: paid students bring a significant additional income to the university, while the university does not depend on them very much and, accordingly, can pursue a fairly principled quality control policy. This group includes 13 directions, the largest one is “health care”, where 17 thousand paid students accounted for 25 thousand budget first-year students. Applicants enrolled in educational programs in these areas have pronounced career expectations and are set for fairly high incomes in the future.

Fourth group- paid reception is from 81 to 150% of the budget. Paid enrollment for universities in this group is almost as important as budget enrollment, but the latter still remains a “support link” in the economy of the university and the formation of its personnel policy (the vast majority of teachers are on budgetary rates and only receive additional payments through paid enrollment). There are only five such areas: “design”, “business informatics” and “service sector”, as well as those with a small set of “publishing” and “art theory”.

Finally, fifth group includes nine destinations, paid admission to which is more than two times (and often three or four) higher than the budget. Here, as a rule, there is a completely different economy: some of the teachers are framed at “extrabudgetary” rates, and paying students determine the quality of the audience. The university is forced to focus on paying students in its quality policy. Among the largest areas of this group are "economics", "jurisprudence", "management", "linguistics and foreign languages”, “state and municipal administration”, “advertising” and “international relations”.

Table 10 Groups of destinations with the highest budget intake

Direction group	Enrolled in budget places, thousand people2015 / 2014	Enrolled in paid places, thousand people2015 / 2014		Notes
healthcare	24,5 / 23,8	17,2 / 16,2	70%
Pedagogy	21,5 / 22,5	6,3 / 5,4	30%	Increasing the quality of budgetary and paid reception; rising prices
Informatics and Computer Engineering	18,5 / 17	2,5 / 2,6	13%
Agriculture	16 / 16	0,8 / 1,3	5%
Construction	13,5 / 13,5	2,9 / 2,2	21%	Price rise
Vehicles	12,5 / 12	0,8 / 0,6	6%
Energy	11,5 / 11,5	0,8 / 0,5	7%
Mathematics	9,5 / 9,1	0,8 / 0,7	8%	Rising prices and quality of paid reception
Electronics, radio engineering and communications	9 / 8,7	0,4 / 0,3	5%	Slight price cut
Ecology	8,5 / 8	0,8 / 1,1	9%	Price rise

Table 11 Groups of destinations with the highest paid reception

Direction group	Enrolled in budget places, thous. persons 2015 / 2014	Enrolled in paid places, thous. persons 2015 / 2014	The share of paid reception relative to the budget	Notes
Economy	7,9 / 8,9	28 / 33,5	356%	The only major area where the target figures for budget admission have decreased. Increasing the quality of paid reception while reducing the quantity
healthcare	24,5 / 23,8	17,2 / 16,2	70%
Jurisprudence	5,7 / 5,3	16,5 / 15	289%	Growth of budgetary and paid reception
Management	7,7 / 7,4	14 / 20	179%	A sharp reduction in paid reception with an increase in quality and a significant increase in price
Pedagogy	21,5 / 22,5	6,3 / 5,4	30%	Increasing the quality of budget and paid reception, rising prices
Linguistics and foreign languages	2,9 / 2,8	5,2 / 4	181%	Increasing the quality of budgetary reception; a sharp increase in the number of paid reception with a sharp rise in prices
State and municipal administration	1,5 / 1,5	4,9 / 8	331%
Service sector	3,9 / 3,8	4,4 / 5,6	113%	A sharp reduction in paid reception with an increase in quality and a significant increase in prices
Advertising and public relations	0,9 / 0,7	3,3 / 3,3	378%
International relationships	0,9 / 1,0	3,2 / 2,9	348%

It can be seen that the list of the largest budgetary areas and the list of the largest paid areas intersect only in two cases: in “health care” and “pedagogy”. This is the result of the fact that over the past few years the Ministry of Education and Science has reduced budget admissions by 1.5-2 times for the three most popular paid groups - "economics", "jurisprudence" and "management". The reduction reflects, among other things, the policy of ousting the frankly weak educational programs implemented by non-core universities that do not have sufficient human resources. This policy began with the “cutting off” of budgetary admission, but it also affects paid admission: a number of universities have recently curtailed the corresponding programs.

Traditionally, paid admission is carried out primarily for socio-economic and humanitarian areas, as well as medical ones. If in the structure of budget reception they occupy 27%, then in the structure of paid admission they make up about 87%. Natural Sciences(directions of classical universities) occupy about 14% in the budget admission, while in the paid enrollment their share slightly exceeds 2%. The share of technical sciences and technologies accounts for over 40% of the budget set and only 10% of the paid one. This structure is generally reproduced throughout the entire observation period (2011-2015) with variations within 3-5%. See table. 10.

Table 12 Structure of budgetary and paid admission by branches of knowledge, 2011-2015

Budget Admission		2015	2014	2013	2012	2011
	agricultural science, %	6,5	6,7	6,4	6,4	6,0
	humanitarian sciences, %	7,8	7,7	8,0	7,6	8,0
	natural Sciences, %	14,1	13,8	13,8	14,0	14,5
	medical sciences, %	8,6	8,5	7,3	6,9	7,1
	pedagogical sciences, %	10,6	11,2	11,5	11,8	11,1
	Social sciencies, %	10,5	11,0	12,0	13,0	13,4
	Technical science, %	41,9	41,1	41,0	40,3	40,0
	Total people enrolled	288 808	282 474	307 046	314 752	301 327

Paid reception		2015	2014	2013	2012	2011
	agricultural science, %	0,6	1,0	1,0	1,0	0,8
	humanitarian sciences, %	22,9	18,6	18,5	16,9	19,2
	natural Sciences, %	2,3	2,5	2,8	3,3	2,7
	medical sciences, %	12,3	11,0	11,2	9,9	11,2
	pedagogical sciences, %	6,1	4,7	4,6	4,6	3,9
	Social sciencies, %	45,1	53,8	53,1	53,0	52,3
	Technical science, %	10,7	8,3	8,7	11,3	9,8
	Total people enrolled	135 524	147 660	157 878	153 389	99 620*

Comparison of the quality of budget and paid reception - 2015

Traditionally paid education is chosen by weaker students, and here the threshold is set - or not set - by the universities themselves.

More than half of the "three" students (average USE score below 56) paid training recruited in 2015 150 universities out of 412 included in the rating (36%). This is a significant improvement in the situation - last year there were 198, almost half (48%).

Table 13 Distribution of universities by the quality of state-funded and paid admissions

The bulk of students who pay for their full-time education on their own are no longer “triple students”. These are the "good guys". What is the cause of such a shift? We can make two assumptions. First, the students of 2015, on the whole, passed the USE somewhat better. Second, polarization has taken place both between universities and within groups of areas. In popular universities, students are ready to enter the paid form, while outsiders are left with the weakest applicants, including the state-funded form.

The charts below compare the quality of the budget set with the quality of the paid set. The Y-axis shows the average score of the paid set, and the X-axis shows the average score of the budget set. The color of the "peas" reflects the quality of the paid enrollment: green - the average score is above 70, white - the average score is below 70 and above 56, red - the average score is below 56. paid places most often recruit applicants who are "good students" (average score 56-70). In technical universities, where there are more “good students” in the group as a whole, up to half of the paid enrollment is “triple students” (the average score is below 56), however, it is clear that “triple students” are, as a rule, universities with a small enrollment.

Applicants and their families began to better distinguish the quality of educational programs, their contribution (as well as the contribution of the brand of the university) to human capital students. In 2015, the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation for the first time published data on the average earnings and professional employment of university graduates. If earlier the information that graduates of top universities earn on average 1.5 times more than graduates of other universities in the same field was discussed at the level of individual cases, opinions and rumors (forming, nevertheless, public opinion), now this trend can be considered proven.

There is a change in the structure of the state assignment - the expansion of engineering areas, a further reduction in socio-economic (due to economics and business informatics). It is assumed that the population shows sufficient solvent demand for programs of socio-economic and humanitarian areas, which makes it possible to do without increasing budget support.

Many universities that did not receive state assignments for the implementation of popular educational programs (economics, management, etc.) continued to accept applicants for them completely on an extrabudgetary basis. This required personnel and information support for programs, which in such a situation was significantly weakened by universities. The result is obvious: the paid enrollment in these universities is reduced, in other cases dropping to a level that is critical for the further continuation of such programs.

In the risk zone here are universities that enroll less than 30 students for paid programs that are not supported by a budget set in the relevant direction. After all, firstly, a paid student, as a rule, is less prepared than one who has entered a state-funded place, and therefore runs a greater risk of being among the underachievers. Secondly, such a student may stop studying not only due to poor progress, but also for financial reasons. Already in the third year, less than half of the initially recruited paying students may remain, and the funds coming from them will not be enough even to pay for the necessary teachers.

2015 may become a milestone year for about 60% of the current purely extrabudgetary programs in the areas of "economy", "management", "jurisprudence" and other socio-economic and humanitarian areas: in 2016, these programs may stop a new set (in 2015 they recruited less than 30 people).

Reception quality dynamics, 2011-2015

Most high quality of the budget set is stably maintained in medical and socio-economic universities, and in the latter for the period from 2011 to 2015 the "green zone" (average score above 70) has noticeably expanded. Agrarian universities remain mostly in the "red zone" (the average USE score for a university is below 56). Among classical universities and technical universities, the proportions of "excellent", "good" and "three" universities are approximately the same and remain unchanged. The quality of budgetary enrollment in pedagogical universities has noticeably improved.
In the paid set as a whole, the same proportions are maintained, although with a certain shift towards lower scores.

Pricing Strategies of Universities in an Economic Downturn

Among universities offering paid programs in 2015, 47% increased prices compared to 2014, 36% kept them unchanged in nominal terms, 17% found it necessary to reduce prices (we considered changes of more than 5 thousand rubles in year). At the same time, 14 universities increased the average cost of education for the university by 50-100 thousand rubles a year; 39 universities - for 20-50 thousand rubles a year; 124 universities - for 5-20 thousand rubles a year; 137 universities did not change the cost in any way or changed it slightly (within 5 thousand rubles), 58 universities reduced the cost of education by 5-20 thousand rubles, and 8 universities - by 20-50 thousand rubles.

At the same time, the models of behavior - the distribution of universities into groups of raising and lowering prices - differ in directions. training: in relation to socio-economic and humanitarian programs, on the one hand, and technical programs, on the other, universities more often adhere to different strategies. Among the technical areas, the share of programs that reduced the cost of education in 2015 is noticeably higher. Among the socio-economic programs, the share of those that increased the cost of education relatively slightly (5-20 thousand rubles) prevails.

Thus, in the direction of "economics" in 2015, 305 universities conducted a paid enrollment, of which 30 universities increased the cost by more than 20 thousand rubles a year, 95 universities - by 5-20 thousand rubles and 18 universities reduced the cost by 5- 60 thousand rubles. In the direction of "jurisprudence" paid enrollment in 2015 was conducted by 181 universities, of which 26 universities increased the cost by more than 20 thousand rubles a year, 63 universities - by 5-20 thousand rubles and 6 universities reduced the cost by 5-60 thousand .rubles At the same time, more than a third of universities lowered their prices by more than 5,000 rubles in the direction of "informatics and computer engineering", and almost half of such universities in the direction of "energy and power engineering".

Table 14 Change in the cost of education in the areas of training, 2014-2015

What are the differences in the pricing policy of metropolitan and regional universities? The spread of prices amongexpensive educational programs significantlyhigher than among moderately priced programs. At the same time, the proportions of expensive and inexpensive programs in different areas of training are approximately the same. There are three strategies for the pricing policy of universities: a single cost for all educational programs (demand is determined by the quality of the program and the reputation of the university); price differentiation of programs; segmentation of programs into popular and unpopular.

Strong universities, as expected, set high minimum scores. In the "ten" strongest universities in terms of the quality of budget admission, the average minimum score is 61.3 points (per subject for all universities) - against 34.2 according to the thresholds of Rosobrnadzor. The highest scores among the leading universities were set by the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, MEPhI, NRU HSE, St. Petersburg Academic University - the scientific and educational center of nanotechnologies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The lowest are MGIMO and Moscow State University. Lomonosov (by the way, this did not affect the high quality of admission to these universities). But among the 74 universities from the "red" zone (the average USE score enrolled in state-funded places in them is below 56), none of them set a minimum threshold higher than the level proposed by Rosobrnadzor.

Only 15% of universities use minimum scores as a real tool for selecting applicants.

Universities with the highest passing scores in 2015:

Baltic Federal University im. I. Kant
All-Russian Academy of Foreign Trade, Moscow
State. Institute of the Russian Language. A.S. Pushkin, Moscow
State. University of Management, Moscow
Kuban state. un-t, Krasnodar
Leningrad state. un-t im. A.S. Pushkin, St. Petersburg
Moscow state. humanitarian un-t them. M.A. Sholokhov
Moscow Institute of Electronics and Mathematics, Higher School of Economics
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology
National research Tomsk Polytechnic University
National research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow
National research Nuclear University "MEPhI", Moscow
Novosibirsk National research state university
Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation
Russian Economic University im. G.V. Plekhanov
Samara State university
St. Petersburg State. university
St. Petersburg Nat. research University of Information Technology, Mechanics and Optics
Smolensk State university
Tver state. university
Ural Federal University im. B.N. Yeltsin
Southern Federal University

Areas of study for which universities often set high passing scores.