UNIVERSITY TEACHER’S MISSION: VISION FOR THE SECOND DECADE OF BOLOGNA PROCESS
Building the joint area of higher education in Europe within the framework of the Bologna process, other processes of integration and national self-determination have shown the need to create a new model of university education and rethink the role of the educator in it. The isolation of professors and students, which presented in the most part of the twentieth century, was to a certain extent a brake on development, which required shaping new relations in the educational environment. In this connection, as a target could be offered formation of conditions for the upbringing of a modern self-sufficient personality, who clear understands the national level achievements and their contribution to the world development, possesses the ability to think critically, to work in a team, to respect different opinions and values. Joint activity of the teachers and students in the educational process, research work and other activities is the method of achieving this goal.
1. Educational and Student Policy (2017). Available at: https://www.educationalpolicy.admin.cam.ac.uk/quality-assurance (accessed 01.10.2017).
2. Commission of Inquiry Report (2010). Available at: http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/coi/
commissionofinquiryreport/chapter8/ (accessed 01.10.2017).
3. Readings B. The University in Ruins. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1996. 238 p.
4. Bousquet M. How the University Works. New York, New York University Press, 2007. 301 p.
5. Dubinin B. Intellektual'nye gruppy i simvolicheskie formy. Ocherki sotsiologii sovremennoy kul'tury [Intellectual groups and symbolic forms. Briefs on sociology of moderm culture]. Moscow, New Publishing House, 2004. 352 p.
6. Nixon J. Higher Education and the Public Good: Imagining the University. London; New York, Continuum, 2011. 152 p.
7. Kazarenkov V. I., Kazarenkova T. B. Universiteskoe obrazovanie: vneauditornye zanjatija studentov po uchebnym disciplinam [University education: out-of-class student training on the
studding disciplines]. Moscow, RUDN Publ., 2014. 168 p.
8. Barnett R. Improving Higher Education: Total Quality Care. Bristol, Open University Press, 1992. 240 p.
9. INQAAHE. Guidelines of Good Practice / 2016 Revised Edition. Wellington, INQAAHE, 2016. 16 p.
10. Quality Framework for UNESCO Schools. Enschede, Netherlands Institute for Curricula Development, 2011. 38 p.
11. Harvey L. The End of Quality? Quality in Higher Education, 2002, no. 8, pp. 5–22.
12. Green D. What Is Quality in Higher Education? Bristol, Taylor & Francis, 1994. 132 p.
13. Vlăsceanu L., Grünberg L., Pârlea D. Quality Assurance and Accreditation: A Glossary
of Basic Terms and Definitions. Bucharest, CPES, 2007. 117 p.
14. Vetokhin S. Adaptation of Belarusian universities teachers for circumstances of transition to Bologna conceps of higher school. Vysshaya shkola: opyt, problemy, perspektivy [Higher school: experience, problems and prospects]. Moscow, PFUR, 2016, part 1, pp. 198–200 (In Russian).
15. Hamze W., Vetokhin S. Using Educational Technology to Analyze Quality Assurance in the Lebanese Higher Education Sector. Vysshaya shkola: opyt, problemy, perspektivy [Higher school: experience, problems and prospects]. Moscow, PFUR, 2017, part 1, pp. 477–488.
16. Kazarenkov V. I. Mission of higher school teacher as a researcher, mentor and human. Vestnik PFUR, seriya “Psihologiya i pedagogika” [PFUR Proceedings: series of psychology and
pedagogic], 2008, no. 3, pp. 87–91 (In Russian).
17. Kazarenkov V. I. Teacher’s creativity as a system. Sistemnaya psihologia i sociologiya [System psychology and sociology], 2011, no. 3, pp. 109–114 (In Russian).