Formation of a state approach to the accumulation of human potential through the prism of the importance of education

Gorokhova Svetlana Sergeevna ORCID: 0000-0002-4919-1093 PhD in Law Associate Professor; Department of International and Public Law; Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation 109456, Russia, Moscow, 38 Shcherbakovskaya str., room 805 Swettalana@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Caring for the well-being of society, accumulation of human potential, and contributing to the achievement of its development goals is a key responsibility of any state and one of the main goals of ensuring Russia's national security (Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated 07/02/2021 N 400 "On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation" // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, 07/05/2021, N 27 (Part II), art. 5351). At the same time, the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation, as well as other legal acts in force in Russia, currently does not define the term "human potential" itself, indicating only that further development of human potential should be ensured by measures aimed at sustainable growth of incomes and welfare of Russian citizens, creation of a comfortable and safe environment for living the formation of a healthy lifestyle, the unconditional realization throughout the country of constitutional rights and guarantees in the fields of health, sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population, social security, education and culture. Moreover, the very mention of human potential in existing regulatory and policy documents is extremely rare, to be more precise, in only five acts of various legal nature: the already mentioned National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation; the Strategy of Socio-Economic Development of the North Caucasus Federal District for the period up to 2030; the National Program of Socio-Economic Development The Far East for the period up to 2024 and for the future up to 2035; The National Standard of the Russian Federation "Lean manufacturing. Basic provisions and vocabulary" (GOST R 56020-2020); and in the National Standard of the Russian Federation "Strategic Development. Good regulatory practices. A guide to good practice in the field of environmental management" (GOST R 56260-2014). Significantly more, about a hundred documents, operate with the category of "human capital", also without giving a clear definition of this concept and contextually using it depending on the purposes of the adoption of an act. This creates some legal uncertainty related both to the understanding of these terms themselves and their relationship to each other. And also, which is probably the most important thing, there are no unified approaches and a unified methodology for determining indicators of the development of both human potential and human capital. For example, the above-mentioned National Standard of the Russian Federation "Strategic development. Good regulatory practices. The Guide to Good Practice in the field of environmental management" (GOST R 56260-2014), includes paragraph 5.5 "Measuring human potential", which indicates that the United Nations Development Program has developed a number of measurements of human development potential, expressed in terms of the Human Development Index (HDI) in each country. This indicator includes a weighted combination of indicators: life expectancy; educational level; standard of living, approximated taking into account gross domestic product and expressed using purchasing power parity.

In the same section, it is mentioned that the UN has also developed an alternative measure - the Human Poverty Index (HPI), reflecting the degree of human impoverishment and taking into account the possibility of a person not living to 40 years of age, the percentage of adult literate population, lack of economic resources. The specified National Standard does not contain any information about the national approach to measuring human potential, or specifying the measurement of individual parameters of human development in the Russian Federation. Probably, based on the considerations that such measurements are not the task of the state itself, but are within the competence of supranational structures, in this case, the UN. It is impossible to agree with this, taking into account the priority goals set out in the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation. Although, perhaps the whole point is that the standard was adopted in 2014, and at the moment it is simply outdated. Nevertheless, this does not negate the need to determine the legal terminology used and develop common methodological approaches to determining the achievement of human potential and human capital development goals. Actually, this is the main scientific and applied problem, since not only in legal regulation, but also at the level of legal research, there is an opinion that today the idea of human potential remains vague, and the main context of the application of this concept is mainly journalistic because there is no generally recognized definition of this term, no uniform criteria for definition have been developed the level of its development and the methodology for assessing the state, the mechanism for making state decisions based on the principle of balancing the interests of society and man.^[1][2]

Naturally, there is also no unified approach to determining the role and place of education in the development of human potential and the accumulation of human capital. Although both concepts have deep and extensive historical roots, and the terms themselves appeared in scientific and then in legal usage not yesterday. Moreover, if we turn to the legal and technical aspect of building measures aimed at further development of human potential listed in the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation, then we can see that steady income growth of Russian citizens is put in the first place, while education actually completes the list of measures, ahead only of culture. Meanwhile, one of the main threats to the national security of the Russian Federation is the actual lack of technological sovereignty of the country, which clearly follows from the Concept of Technological Development for the period up to 2030 (Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 05/20/2023 N 1315-r <On approval of the Concept of technological development for the period up to 2030> // Collection of legislation of the Russian Federation, 05/29/2023, N 22, art. 3964). In turn, the achievement of technological sovereignty in the current geopolitical situation directly depends on improving the level of education of citizens and the formation of scientific and industrial potential of the country. Today, it is education, along with healthcare, that underlies the development of human potential, and it is this approach that was laid down by the authors of the very idea of human potential as a factor determining the well-being of society.

The founder of the modern concept of human potential is considered to be Amartya Kumar Sen,^[3] whose works formed the basis for the research of Pakistani economist Mahbub Ul-Haq, who, together with a group of scientists, developed the concept of human development, which formed the basis for the annual human development reports under the United Nations Development Program since 1990.^[4]

According to Mahbub Ul-Haq in the 1950s, there was a tacit assumption in the Western economy that the real goal of the development of the state and society was always and only to increase national income, but to assert the opposite was "heresy". Not considering this postulate to be true, Hack developed the Human Development index, which more subtly measured the achievements of countries than GNP (gross national product). The index proposed by Hack identified the welfare of the nation with criteria such as life expectancy, education, well-being, and physical income.

In such a coordinate system of social development, a person was perceived as much more than just one of the resources for achieving social progress - he received the status of the main beneficiary enjoying the fruits of social evolution. At the same time, according to the proposed concept, human development should be understood as a systematic increase in the increasing trajectory of the range of intellectual, social, economic and political choices available to each individual. Mahbub Ul-Haq's merit here was that he changed the point of view of many people who had previously concentrated solely on their income level, and proposed a new framework for social assessment - broader and more flexible. This allowed us to free ourselves from the pressure of income comparison methods, and made possible the coexistence of many diverse and even multi-level values.^[5] Simply put, while health and education indicators directly reflect basic capabilities, income is considered as an element with applied value in relation to basic human capabilities. This view of things did not leave many indifferent, and, a vivid example of its real embodiment in the political economy of states, can be the example of Bhutan with its concept of gross national happiness (Gross national happiness URL: https://www.bez-granic.ru/novosti/national-happiness.html ).

This approach obviously contrasts with the above excerpt from the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation, where, when listing measures designed to ensure the further development of the human potential of our country, it is the growth of income of the population that is put in the first place.

The concept of human development was preceded by the idea of "human capital", which originated in the bosom of economics. Its foundations were formulated in the works of the apologists of classical economic theory: W. Petty and D. Ricardo. They, along with A. Smith, were among the first to incorporate into science conclusions about the importance of the workforce, in particular, the importance of employee education in the growth of the welfare of states and members of society. The positioning of the theoretical basis of human capital as a separate scientific direction correlates with the research of the second half of the twentieth century, provoked by specific socio-economic reasons, among which the following are the cornerstones.

To begin with, at this time there was a transition to innovative production caused by scientific and technological progress. This, in turn, led to an increase in the importance of the practical ability to perform complex labor functions, as a result of which the role and place of labor resources in the production process underwent a serious rethink. Further, under the influence of the introduction of new technologies, in many areas of industrial and technological production, the costs of highly professional and intellectual labor began to gain an increasing share in the cost structure of the product. At the same time, the significant material intensity of production was gradually replaced by highly intelligent and professional workers.

Then, under the influence of the previously mentioned factors, the process of humanization intensified in a number of countries around the world, and the idea of human value acquired the status of a state approach in many spheres of public life, including the economic one. Of course, we are not talking here about the origin of the most general philosophical idea of humanism, which has deep historical roots and appeared much earlier. It is well known that classical humanism originated in the Renaissance and is associated with the names of R. Bacon, J. Boccaccio, E. Rotterdam, M. Montaigne, T. Mohr, F. Petrarch, and humanistic ideals were laid down by ancient Greek thinkers.^[6] We are talking rather about the legal and, to some extent, the economic principle of humanism, about the moment when humanism ceased to be an ideal social concept and turned into a legal norm.

And finally, the accumulated array of theoretical and methodological developments in the field of human capital research has been transformed into an independent scientific field - the theory of human capital.^[7] The apologists of this theory were American economists, T. Schultz and G. Becker.^[8] The first definition of human capital belongs to Theodor Schultz, whose popularity is associated, in particular, with his work "Formation of the capital of education".^[9]

In his writings, T. Schultz assigns a significant role to higher education, calling it three main functions: talent discovery, training and scientific work. In his opinion, education, which we fully share, increases not only labor productivity, but also the economic value of an employee's time, which is the main trend of economic growth in modern conditions.^[10] Investments in education and healthcare, according to Schultz, are becoming the most important factors in the modernization of economic and legal subsystems of society and the state. This approach makes it possible to perceive social development not only through the prism of increasing economic growth, but also through investments in human capital as a determinant of the elimination of pauperism.^[11]

Later, within the framework of the theory under consideration, a new direction was identified - "human resource development", in which it is concluded that investments in human capital are economically effective. We can observe the effect of such investments on the examples of successfully developing countries. Thus, in 2020, government spending on education in China amounted to about 4.22 percent of national GDP. This value has increased from about 2.5 percent in the mid-1990s. In 2021, government spending on education in China reached 3.76 trillion yuan, while in recent years these types of spending have been constantly growing (Government spending on education as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) in China from 2010 to 2020 // URL: https://translated.turbopages.org/proxy_u/en-ru.ru.5b4a646b-629f1e80-bd103e45-74722d776562/https/www.statista.com/statistics/1113951/china-public-education-expenditure-as-a-share-of-gdp/) which certainly serves the interests of the economic prosperity of this country countries in the 21st century. The same situation can be observed in South Korea, where government spending on education amounted to 4.6% of GDP in the same period (South Korea - Current spending on education // URL: https://knoema.ru/atlas/Южная-Корея/topics/Образование/Финансирование-образования/Расходы-на-образование-percent-от-ВНД). Unfortunately, there is no data available for the last two years, but the figures are still indicative. It should be noted that education spending in Russia in 2020 amounted to 4.6% of GDP (4% — government spending, 0.6% — from non-budgetary sources). At the same time, it should also be noted that the total expenditure on education in our country initially decreased from 5.1% of GDP in 2006 to 4.1% in 2017-2018, after which it began to grow (in 2019, this figure was 4.3% of GDP) (There are more and more states in education // URL: https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5192784 ). If we talk about the period starting from 2022, then in relation to the volume of GDP of the corresponding year, the share of expenditures in the "Education" section of the Federal Law "On the Federal Budget for 2022 and for the planning period of 2023 and 2024 is 0.9% in 2022-2024 (Federal Law No. 390-FZ dated 06.12.2021On the federal budget for 2022 and for the planning period of 2023 and 2024"// Rossiyskaya Gazeta, No. 281, 12/10/2021).

In addition, it should be remembered that in modern Russia, unlike China (or the practice of Soviet times), there are currently no requirements for the employment of graduates. In fact, the state, investing in higher education, in many cases engages in altruism, since a graduate having received knowledge in Russian universities for the money of the Russian budget, then can freely, without any restrictions, dispose of them, including leaving the country for employment abroad, where he will subsequently contribute to contribute to the development of the economy and pay taxes, making investments in their education for their native state not only meaningless, but also irretrievably lost. We believe it would be very appropriate to look at the practice of those states that control the "profitability" of funds invested in the education of their young citizens, maintain their own human resources, and at the same time have serious successes in the economy. That is, the problem lies not only in the insufficiency of investments in the educational sphere, but also in the possibility for the state to receive guaranteed "dividends" from the invested funds. Therefore, considering the benefits for each individual, it is simply impossible to ignore the public benefit, it is necessary to find a reasonable balance of interests. Of course, many researchers in earlier periods and now recognize the leading role of human potential in the development of society.^[12] At the same time, the human capital of an individual is an accumulated stock of unique and special knowledge, as well as professional skills that allow in the future to obtain a variety of tangible and intangible benefits. So, exploring the issues of human potential development as a public good, the accumulation of human capital must be directly linked to the modernization of the educational system.^[13] Moreover, not only by guaranteeing the realization of constitutional rights to education throughout the country (as stated in the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation), but also by ensuring the transition of the scientific and educational environment to a qualitatively new level that can benefit both the individual and society, the state, as a whole.

This is especially important because the current system of "education for education's sake" does not fully meet the demands of modernity and causes a number of legitimate problems, the most obvious of which are the following. Firstly, the employer, as a rule, does not see in yesterday's graduate a fully trained employee, and therefore prefers to hire those who already have experience in their specialty, and, often, making a choice in favor of having work experience rather than a specialized diploma.^[14] That is, the employer has empirically already made a choice in favor of the "qualifications market" rather than the "diploma market". Secondly, and this is directly related to the previously stated first point, a graduate is often forced to look for work not in his specialty, but according to the availability of employment, which significantly devalues the value of his education. And, finally, thirdly, taking into account the first two problems, a situation arises when a significant part of employees who have received higher education in one specialty carry out their work in a completely different field.^[15] These specific features naturally deprive the process of transition from education to work of consistency, and, consequently, reduce its effectiveness. We believe that this situation needs to be corrected by bringing higher education closer to practical activity, thereby increasing the trust of both the employer and the future employee in it, and breaking the education system as an end in itself.

Of course, it will not be easy to do this, including because the modern workplace, under the influence of technological progress, is in a constant state of evolution. Therefore, employees must also constantly improve their knowledge and skills in order to continue to meet the high demands of the employer and the labor market. And, of course, higher education institutions should play a key role in educating people at all stages of their careers, ^[16] since such a result depends not only on the initial "basic" education, but also on the possibility of effective on-the-job training. This is certainly not a new, but still a very promising segment of higher education, which has unlimited potential for growth. The state, universities and other institutions are already promoting lifelong learning as a key principle, and professional development in vocational education is just a natural development of this trend. This is evidenced by a number of official, including policy documents of the state, for example, the previously mentioned National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation (paragraph 13, paragraph 33) (Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated 07/02/2021 N 400 "On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation"// Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, 07/05/2021, N 27 (part II), article 5351).This is a very important aspect of the activities of higher education institutions in the current situation, when, as we said earlier, a significant part of employees carry out their work functions in areas unrelated to their initial professional training, and when the reality of work is constantly changing and constantly requires updating initial skills. Therefore, the training of specialists in demand on the labor market, followed by "support" throughout their lives, is one of the most important tasks of modern educational institutions in the formation and accumulation of human capital.^[17]

Educational institutions should provide an opportunity for current students to develop practical skills through work experience and professional internships. In addition, it is useful to recall the Soviet experience of the mentoring institute, which can certainly help prepare future graduates for a competitive labor market. Let us recall that mentoring is the oldest form of teaching applied knowledge to the younger ones, forming their life values and positive attitudes.^[18] It is also important to intensify work in the field of organizing effective mentoring, because currently in the priority national project "Education" the topic of mentoring runs through the red thread, covering virtually all federal projects in its composition, including "The Success of every child", "Teacher of the Future", "Social elevators for everyone", and "Young professionals" (Mentoring in production (digest 2013 – 2019) // URL: https://firo.ranepa.ru/files/docs/spo/nastavnichestvo_na_proizvodstve.pdf ).

Thus, in accordance with the Passport of the National Project "Education", an increase in the number of highly qualified graduates of educational organizations will be ensured by updating the content of educational programs, training new quality teaching staff and involving practitioners in educational activities, expanding mentoring practices to include representatives of the real sector of the economy ("Passport of the national project "Education" (approved. by the Presidium of the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for Strategic Development and National Projects, Protocol No. 16 dated 12/24/2018) // https://online11.consultant.ru/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc&base=LAW&n=319308&dst=0&rnd=DG8HUg#z5fK09TYk3CfGQXE1). In our opinion, this is a very positive and rational attitude, and now it remains only for its implementation.

It should also be noted that since the process of digitalization of virtually all types of professional activities significantly changes the conditions for working professionals, higher education can provide them with the opportunity to expand their knowledge and acquire new skills as part of advanced training courses. Therefore, higher educational institutions, by creating a wide range of proposals for in-demand areas of professional development, expand the scope of their own impact on the formation of human potential, going beyond, figuratively speaking, the accumulation of "initial human capital" (working with former schoolchildren), but also improve these very initial accumulations, continuing to "polish" the professional skills of already working specialists.^[19] However, it should be remembered here that such advanced training courses should really benefit existing employees, add real contributions to their existing knowledge and skills, the most modern, or even advanced competencies. And, for this, teachers themselves, as representatives of higher education, must possess relevant knowledge and constantly improve their professionalism.

As mentioned above, universities should be responsible not only for providing academic knowledge, but also for providing opportunities to learn skills in performing work functions directly in the workplace, gain industry experience and the real benefits of mentoring. However, there is an opinion that the existing system of practices (educational, industrial, etc.) did not fully cope with this task. Meanwhile, employers are making increasingly high demands on the level of practical training of potential employees (Students should start working at universities / Parliamentary Newspaper https://www.pnp.ru/social/studenty-dolzhny-nachat-rabotat-eshhyo-v-vuzakh.html ?). To solve this problem, Federal Law No. 273-FZ of December 29, 2012 "On Education in the Russian Federation" (Federal Law No. 273-FZ of December 29, 2012 "On Education in the Russian Federation"// Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, December 31, 2012, No. 53 (Part 1), Article 7598) was amended in 2019 related to such a concept as "practical training". Thus, according to paragraph 24 of Article 2 of the said law, practical training is a form of organization of educational activities during the development of an educational program in conditions of students performing certain types of work related to future professional activities and aimed at the formation, consolidation, development of practical skills and competencies in the profile of the relevant educational program.

Practical training can be organized by:

1) directly in an educational organization, including in a structural subdivision of an educational organization intended for practical training;

2) in a specialized organization, including in a structural subdivision of a specialized organization intended for practical training, on the basis of an agreement concluded between an educational organization and a specialized organization.

Of course, not enough time has passed yet to assess the effectiveness of the innovation, however, we believe that in addition to practical training of students in the indicated context, it would not be superfluous at all to adopt the experience of countries that are currently unfriendly to us, and take steps to ensure that universities in our country become one of the main employers, allowing students to gain work experience in the same walls where they study. Such an approach would allow us to solve another task in the formation of human capital, namely, to overcome the psychological difficulties for a young person when initially applying for a job, making this process as comfortable as possible in terms of implementation and interaction with an employer, which could be a university already familiar to the student himself, or social partners-enterprises of this type higher education institutions. At the same time, in order to neutralize one of the most significant threats to national security and in the foreseeable future achieve the technological sovereignty of the country, the same approach should be used not only in the education-work combination, but also in the education-science tandem. Because the key role of higher education institutions is also to stimulate innovation in order to find solutions to the challenges facing the state and society. That is, their role as drivers of innovative development in the new reality is seen in a close (including structural and organizational) relationship with production facilities. At a minimum, a higher education institution should have its own experimental production base in order to be able to independently create a prototype ready for commercialization. As a maximum, become a part of an industrial holding company, and receive a narrow specialization aimed at solving the innovative tasks of this holding (Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 05/20/2023 N 1315-r <On approval of the Concept of technological development for the period up to 2030> (together with the "Concept of technological development for the period up to 2030") // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, 05/29/2023, N 22, art. 3964). This approach has an empirically proven positive effect. The national economy as a whole, as can be seen from the examples of foreign countries, benefits from university research and innovation (Universities ‘generate £95 billion for UK economy’ // https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/universities-generate-ps95-billion-uk-economy ). The study, which was prepared for UK universities by Oxford Economics, says that the gross added contribution of universities' own operations to the country's gross domestic product is £21.5 billion (or 1.2% of GDP), which is 22% more than the contribution of the entire accounting sector, and almost 50 percent more than the contribution of the industry advertising and marketing research. The figure of £95 billion refers to the contribution after the effect of their expenses has been calculated. According to the study, universities also support more than 940,000 jobs, or 3 percent of the total, across the UK. The analysis also showed that universities currently have a larger annual turnover than the UK legal sector, as well as aircraft and spacecraft manufacturing.

A similar situation is developing in Australia, where universities bring $25 billion to the economy (The document must be attributed: Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, Key financial metrics on Australia's higher education sector – November 2017. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED583512.pdf ). In the United States, technological advances by universities and colleges contributed $591 billion to national GDP between 1996 and 2015 alone. In addition, in the United States, colleges and universities are the largest employers in 10 states and two thirds of the 100 largest cities in America. Overall, 3.98 million people, or more than 2.5 percent of the population, work at colleges and universities in the United States (Higher Education Contributes to a Strong Economy // https://agb.org/guardians-campaign/higher-education-contributes-to-a-strong-economy /).

It should be noted here that despite the fact that these countries currently occupy a position unfriendly towards our state, nevertheless, in our opinion, it is necessary to look at such an effective system of innovation activities of Western universities and possibly adopt the most effective practices applied by them. For example, in the most economically developed countries, the last decade has seen a significant increase in the number of research collaborations between enterprises (organizations) and universities. Of course, the Russian Federation is no exception here, however, in our country, compared with other countries, the level of private investment in university research is not sufficient. Until recently, the process of creating endowment funds in educational organizations was not too active. As stated in the Concept of the development of endowment funds of educational institutions of higher education, subordinate to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, for 2023-2035, in order to increase the importance of endowments for universities, it is necessary to increase their volumes to values comparable to the size of annual budgets of universities, involve potential benefactors, improve investment strategy, increase funding for priority projects aimed at the development of the university, increasing the potential of students and teachers, research and development applicable in the real sector of the economy (Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation dated 11/13/2023 N 400-r "On approval of the Concept of development of endowment funds of educational institutions of higher education subordinated to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation for 2023-2035").

At the current stage of Russia's development, in the Concept of Technological Development for the period up to 2030, higher educational institutions (along with scientific organizations) are named subjects of the process of science development, whose main goal is to expand the circulation of new scientific knowledge within the framework of research and development (at the same time, technological innovations are rather a by-product of this meta-process than its the result). These entities are reproached with the virtually complete lack of communication with production systems, the main purpose of which, in fact, is the introduction of technological innovations to update products, services, and the production processes themselves. These entities, production systems, in turn, until recently were not actually interested in domestic developments, preferring to import technological solutions, or even the products themselves from abroad (Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 05/20/2023 N 1315-r <On approval of the Concept of technological development for the period up to 2030> (together with the "Concept of technological development for the period up to 2030") // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, 05/29/2023, N 22, art. 3964). Such a parallel existence of scientific and technological processes, among other things, did not allow achieving a significant technological breakthrough in the domestic economy, which, in turn, when the established import channels were blocked, put the entire system under critical attack.^[20]

Let's say a few words about such a phenomenon in education as international academic mobility, which is still one of the criteria for determining the success of an educational institution (Federal Law No. 273-FZ of December 29, 2012 "On Education in the Russian Federation"// Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, December 31, 2012, No. 53 (Part 1), Article 7598). We believe that in the current situation, it is not always necessary to focus specifically on international cooperation and mobility, since it is obvious that the intra-state mobility of students and teachers in modern Russia has far from exhausted itself. Meanwhile, intra-system connections in the educational environment could seriously contribute not only to improving the quality of education, but also to the socialization of the younger generation, allowing students in their student years to get acquainted not only with the achievements of various scientific schools of various universities, but also with their country in all its diversity and extent. Perhaps, in the process of such familiarization, students will become aware not only of the importance of their country in the world, but also of their place in this country. Familiarization with the achievements of academic science of other higher educational institutions located in different regions of the state, and not only of their native university, will allow not only students, but also teachers to enrich their professional and life experience, as well as to acquire a high-quality level of development of general cultural competencies.

Of course, as noted earlier, achieving the stated results should be accompanied by updating the competencies of teaching staff, including through the introduction of professional standards for teachers and a certification model based on this standard with the participation of the professional community. Perhaps we should consider introducing a qualification test for university teachers who are hired.

In general, now that the Russian higher education system is no longer bound by the Bologna Agreements, in our opinion, the time is coming for great opportunities: we are, as it were, in a "quantum superposition", when the Russian education system has experience in implementing at least two fundamentally different models, and at the same time, there is an unlimited opportunity to take advantage of this situation and take only the best from both systems, rejecting ineffective elements. Of course, the measure of effectiveness here should be precisely the available empirical evidence in the context of generations. That is, it is necessary to focus not on the beauty of theoretical models, but on the practical result of their implementation. Fortunately, Russian education has such an opportunity.

And here, thinking about how we can prepare the most effective graduate, and in the future, of course, an employee, it is necessary to remember that education, being in modern conditions, indisputably the key tools for the reproduction of the human potential of the nation, is certainly not the only factor influencing its creation.

In this regard, I would like to recall a student saying from Soviet times, which sounded something like this: "It is better to have a red (ruddy) face, but a blue diploma, than a blue (pale) face, but a red diploma." Of course, this is a student joke, in many ways designed to justify the insufficient personal success in the education of jokers. But, speaking quite seriously, when creating a new, we believe, already hybrid model of Russian education, it should be remembered that the primary task of any civilized society is to preserve the health of the nation, not only physically, but also psychologically. Indeed, college years can not only be the best years of a human life, but they can also bring unfamiliar situations and feelings of depression. Universities should take mental health as seriously as physical health: relationship problems, living away from home, and financial difficulties are all examples of the pressures students face. The impact of a bad psychological state on student life can be extremely devastating.

It is human health that is the second, key element of the folded human capital of each individual, therefore, the task of universities to form it is complemented, in addition to the main function – providing high-quality and in-demand education in the labor market, and also caring for the preservation of the health of the people entrusted to it. Moreover, this should be not only a concern for students, but also for all employees of higher education. Students, as well as employees of higher educational institutions, spend a very significant amount of time within the walls of the university, while the specifics of obtaining /providing education occur as if in the "online" mode, and it turns out that both students and teachers are much more attached to the "process" than people doing other things. They can't take a break for a while and then start where they left off. They experience extremely significant mental stress, which of course affects fatigue and the general condition of the body. That is why universities should try to ensure that all their staff, teachers and students have access to basic medical services. Of course, in the Russian Federation, unlike, for example, the United States, there is compulsory medical insurance, which is certainly a striking achievement in building a welfare state. But, on the other hand, in our country, there is a practice of additional medical insurance, and in some cases such insurance is carried out at the expense of the employer, which certainly increases the level of social partnership, trust in such organizations, and increases their rating in the eyes of all involved persons.

Another factor influencing the preservation of the health of higher education workers and students is the intensity and "density" of the educational process.

And if everything is quite good with the student workload, compared with other countries of the world – the Russian student is not loaded as much as, for example, the American one, then the situation with Russian teachers is fundamentally different.

Considering what the classroom load of university teachers abroad is, A.A. Yashin, M.N. Strukova write: "The example of foreign universities shows us the average specific weight of the academic load of about 300-350 hours per year with an average share of the classroom load of 150-200 hours per teacher. At the same time, the teaching staff is actively engaged in research and participates in grants. It seems that a teacher who actively attracts grant and other third-party funds is a more "profitable" income-generating center for the university than a teacher who spends almost all his time lecturing and conducting seminars."^[21]

Speaking about the workload of teachers at Russian universities, the researchers point out that according to current regulatory documents, the classroom load is 36 astronomical or 48 academic hours per week. Per year (52 weeks – 8 weeks of paid leave = 44 weeks) This will amount to about 1,500 astronomical hours (excluding holidays) or about 2,000 academic hours. On average, the workload of university teachers today is 850 classroom hours (no more than 900 per year according to the Standard Regulations on the university), therefore, 1150 remains."^[22]

Obviously, these figures do not speak in favor of Russian teachers, although of course, we do not urge blindly copying Western experience without taking into account national realities. However, here's what you should probably think about. Such a burden would probably be quite justified, taking into account, for example, the Soviet education system, when teachers were mainly engaged only in the educational process, and scientific research was carried out by employees of research institutes and other scientific institutions, but, in modern conditions, when the trend is the integration of science and education, with concentration in universities, such The workload already seems to be clearly excessive.^[23][24] Such a situation, in our opinion, can negatively affect not only the quality of teaching, the results of scientific activity and the publication activity of teachers, but also the most serious way to affect the health of people who are forced to spend a significant part of their lives in a situation of "emergency" and concomitant stress.

To summarize, it should be noted that the importance of rich human potential for any modern society and state is difficult to overestimate. It is also difficult to overestimate the role of higher education institutions in the formation of both the human potential of the country as a whole and the individual human capital of each individual. Universities, contributing to this capital in the form of high-quality education and scientific research, which is in demand in the realities of the innovative economy, become a key link in the formation of a reliable chain linking the success of the economy, the prosperity of the nation and the well-being of every member of society. Such a role, on the one hand, imposes on higher education institutions a special responsibility for the success of the mission assigned to them, and on the other hand, it should draw the attention of the state to the urgent needs of the universities themselves in order, acting harmoniously, to jointly achieve significant success today, develop them tomorrow, and surpass them three times in the future.

And, of course, the place of quality education in general, and higher education in particular, in the system of measures aimed at developing the human potential of our country, should be revised towards increasing its priority along with the task of preserving the health of the nation.