Keywords

Education, International Rankings, Educational Management, National University, Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), Post-Soviet Higher Educational Institutions, Entrepreneurship Education.

Introduction

Presently, competitiveness of the higher education system in the international market of educational services can be represented by the world’s recognition of the country’s achievements in higher education. In recent years, in connection with considerable recess and expansion of globalization processes in the educational sphere, a competitive struggle for entrants and various forms of investment between national university systems and educational centers has sharpened. Necessity to develop the higher education system of post-Soviet countries in the conditions of globalization and integration processes on the conditions of Bologna process have resulted in using the world’s general educational standards. The latter is especially relevant for entrepreneurial education, as it is considered an important factor in the socioeconomic growth and development of the country. Not to mention that students want to receive the best qualifications, relevant knowledge and skills (Karimi et al., 2016).

Post-Soviet higher educational institutions have entered a competition for entrants, where main competitors were educational institutions of the USA and the Great Britain with considerably more expensive education and with higher educational institutions of Central and East Europe, where the price of educational services is often cheaper. Global rating system evaluating more than 2500 high educational institutions in all leading countries of the world plays important role in these processes. In recent decades there has been a huge increase in entrepreneurship education at various universities and colleges around the world. Despite the latter, for the Post-Soviet countries, this direction was lagging behind, there were no official state education programs, and there were few educational institutions (Oganjanyan, 2013). Nowadays, the entrepreneurial education system is being implemented, which is effective, competitive and in no way inferior to the European one.

Actualization of the global ratings of the higher educational institutions is connected with the globalization processes and the process of increasing competition in the educational services sphere of the world. If the university manages to get into the top positions of the global ratings (top 10, top 50, top 100 or even top 500) it increases its attractiveness not only for entrants, but also for employers, investors and ensures that the state provides additional subsidies in terms of programs for development of the educational service. Top positions in the global university rating as in any other equivalent ranking or ratings gives definite privileges.

High ranking in the global rating ensures adequate input in the formation of the country’s positive image, and improves its position according to a number of other important parameters as human development index and index of country’s competitiveness.

Ratings serve as indirect indicators of efficiency of the higher educational institution, of assessment of the rendered services’ quality, which, in turn, is a complicated and complex process, which uses an extensive list of evaluating criteria and university’s parameters. Currently, an academic society and in the society as a whole have formed an ambiguous attitude towards university’s rankings. Some are indifferent to them, while others strive to meet their requirements and enter any possible ranking. Thus, position in a ranking is a quantitative reflection of the university’s competitiveness and quality of the rendered services in the higher educational institutions of the country.

Quantity of the higher educational institutions of the specific country gives a possibility of assessing the quality of the whole higher educational system. However, the quality of entrepreneurial education indicates the economic development of the country, which, in the modern world of constant competition, is even more important than the quantity (Frolova et al., 2019). Based on the conducted analytical investigation of universities’ dynamics, authors provide an overview of the development and competitiveness of the Post-Soviet higher entrepreneurship institutions in the chosen countries.

Literature Review

The role of the higher entrepreneurship education in the context of socioeconomic development of the country, problems in the way of increasing its competitiveness are researched by many scholars such as Adambekova & Amankeldy (2015).

For example, Kirdasinova et al. (2016) give information regarding considerable successes of the national universities such as inclusion in the international rating of Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). On the one hand, authors discuss the fact that such an inclusion increases the interest of international students in obtaining Kazakh diploma of higher education, on the other hand, they discuss various problems arising in the course of the development and such an inclusion in the rating.

Studies of the foreign scientists focus on a number of aspects related to the rating and ranking the universities. For instance, Tikhonova (2018) describes the global rating of the higher educational institutions, including entrepreneurial, as a source of information that can be used to define the efficiency of the university and the extent to which stakeholders are interested in its development. Moreover, an author researches method used by the rating organizations and mentions the innovational component of the performance that should be considered as a key criterion of authoritative rating.

Currently, a significant amount of authors joins in a scientific polemic concerning expediency of different use of ratings as a main tool of assessment of global competitiveness of the universities. Many experts and researchers criticize ratings for their bias in assessment of activities of higher education institutions. Epifantseva (2014) notes indistinct substantial interpretation of ratings; use of limited set of indicators for drawing up ratings with the set substantial interpretation; subjectivity of selection of weight coefficients of indicators of rating; usage of limited number of methods of collection of data for calculation of indicators on the studied higher education institutions.

Nevertheless, most researchers agree in a varying degree in opinion that the world rankings of competitiveness are the phenomenon of global character and in present realities ratings are the most popular and effective method of assessment of activity of higher education institutions. Hence, Epifantseva (2014) considers that the international educational ratings, despite the shortcomings specified by her, represent an important indicator of competitiveness of higher education institutions of any country and the indicator of the development level of an education system and even the national innovative system of the countries of the world in general.

Authors as Podberezkin et al. (2012) note that the global ratings of the universities stimulate the national governments to strengthen the policy to reach the level of so-called the world class universities. Positions in the global ratings of the universities in many respects reflect ability of the countries, which they represent, to influence the processes happening in the world.

In the USA, Great Britain, Malaysia, China, Denmark and many European countries, higher education institutions with a good rating in the field of entrepreneurship are very common. Since traditional entrepreneurial education does not meet the changing needs of society, the top universities and graduate schools tend to promote entrepreneurial relationships and business skills. They offer fundamental and innovative education programs. In Korea, for example, the practice-based education programs take into account the level of learners’ motivation for entrepreneurial education and are aimed at intensifying the intention to start a business. Particular attention in this case is paid to the degree of student satisfaction (Byun et al., 2018; Ling & Yumashev, 2018). European universities follow the OECD strategies and simultaneously work to improve the existing teaching methods, create great opportunities for students to acquire the underlying competencies, and encourage entrepreneurial initiative among learners (Blass, 2018). Basically, all entrepreneurship programs focus on the experience, which is needed to identify and commercialize business opportunities. However, the problems in the system of entrepreneurial education are also to be found. For instance, the education system in Spain comprises the autonomous educational institutions, meaning that entrepreneurship programs used by one university may differ significantly from those offered by another university (Hernández-Sánchez et al., 2019).

Likewise, the entrepreneurial education system in most Post-Soviet countries is imperfect. The training is carried out mainly through business training, various classes on innovative business development, development of business ideas and plans, etc. (Rubin, 2015). University education has not got enough educational programs, among which there are "Master of Business Administration", "Economics of Entrepreneurship", etc. Scattered entrepreneurship courses are more common at universities and colleges.

Despite the availability, but some separation and inconsistency of data on development of a system of higher entrepreneurship education in the post-Soviet countries, authors decided to carry out the complex comparative analysis of dynamics of Post-Soviet universities in the global ratings based on interrelations with processes in education. Despite the independence of data of the countries and the systems of their education, a trend of their development, structure, processes, have similarities. Besides, processes of primary "internal migration" of the studying youth between these countries are observed. In this regard, innovative experience of the countries in an education system of some countries can be of value for others.

Methods and Materials

The study is based on the application of qualitative research method and the comparative analysis method, which were aimed at exploring, interpreting and evaluating the educational institution rankings. Information from domestic and foreign research papers was explored using the methods of analysis, synthesis and communication.

The study was conducted using statistics for the 2012-2019 periods from the open sources: rankings published by different rating agencies (QS World University Rankings, Times Higher Education (THE), Shanghai rating of Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU).

Results and Discussion

Researchers of an education system, academics and other stakeholders interested in cooperation with the foreign universities, domestic and international educational, social, and humanitarian organizations express their interest in the situation and dynamics of the organizations of the higher education of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Regarding the direct consumers of educational services–entrants, students and their parents–based on the results of polls majority of them have no idea of researches, assessment and other activity of rating agencies in the field of education. Potential and real students and their parents make their choices of higher education institution based rather on popularity or ideas and beliefs of prestige of the educational institutions.

The following institutions, which have entrepreneurship training programs, are considered prestigious in the Republic of Kazakhstan: Kazakh National University named after Al-Farabi, the Kazakh National pedagogical university named after Abay Kunanbayev, the Karaganda state university named after Buketov, the Kazakh economic university named after Ryskulov and some other higher education institutions. They are considered to in the list of the most recognized higher educational institutions. As for medical institutes, Almaty and Karaganda universities have a high-quality medical institution. Moscow State University named after Lomonosov, the Leningrad (nowadays St. Petersburg) state university; Novosibirsk State University and others were considered as the most reputable higher education institutions during the Soviet Union era. Consumers of educational services in the former USSR viewed the following capitals to be leading in the sphere of higher education Moscow, Almaty, Riga, Tallinn, Baku, Tashkent and others.

During the USSR era, the number of foreign students primarily defined appreciation of the university. Currently, the share of foreign students in the total number of students makes only 4% (about 22 thousand people) in Kazakhstan. The structure of their origin is as follows: citizens of the CIS countries make less than 3%, citizens of foreign countries account for about 1%. For comparison, before the transition to a three-level education system “a bachelor degree–a master’s degree–doctoral degree (PhD)” has started in 2011, the mentioned indicators were 1.4%, 0.4% and 1.0% respectively. Despite the increase in interest of foreign entrants in receiving higher education in Kazakhstan, in our opinion, indicators of popularity of the Kazakhstan universities in other countries are comparably low (Figure 1).

The Kazakh diploma of acquisition of a higher education appeals to potential students from the Asian countries–Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, India, Russia, and China. The greatest number of foreign students are citizens of the Asian countries (Table 1). Awarding the educational grants to representatives of the Kazakh diaspora residing in other countries in particular to residents of China, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kyrgyzstan caused a significant increase in number of students from the listed countries. Execution of the signed international agreements in the field of education with India, Afghanistan, Pakistan Performance and satisfaction of a number of their conditions have caused an increase in the number of students coming from citizens of foreign states.

Table 1: Dynamics Of The Number And Share Of Foreign Students In The Republic Of Kazakhstan, %
Indicators	2002 y.		2012 y.		2019 y.
	Number of people	Share, %	Number of people	Share, %	Number of people	Share, %
Total foreign students, people	7157	100.0	8982	100.0	21727	100.0
Of them came from countries:
Uzbekistan	1733	24.2	2898	32.3	9500	43.7
Turkmenistan	1078	15.1	589	6.6	2615	12.0
Kyrgyzstan	688	9.6	354	3.9	1084	5.0
Russia	935	13.1	1993	22.2	1273	5.9
Tajikistan	176	2.5	397	4.4	503	2.3
India	540	7.5	180	2.0	3717	17.1
China	235	3.3	1145	12.7	1240	5.7
Mongolia	663	9.3	628	7.0	565	2.6
Afghanistan	0	0	119	1.3	399	1.8
Pakistan	312	4.4	77	0.9	440	2.0
Turkey	573	8.0	250	2.8	233	1.1
Number of countries from which students come, units	45	-	39	-	55	-
Number of students in the Republic of Kazakhstan, people	514738	-	629504	-	542458	-
The share of foreign students in the total number, %	-	1.4	-	1.4	-	4.0

Involvement and attraction of students from abroad is particularly important for the aim of ensuring functioning of the national higher education system. Besides, the latter hugely contributes to the entrepreneurial system, both in the country where the education takes place and in the native country of the visiting student. In the analyzed period, the status of the number of foreign students in the neighbouring Russian Federation has changed in the following way. The number of foreign students increased by more than 6 times including students from the Baltic States, the CIS, and Georgia–by 1.6 times, from the countries of Asia-by 1.7 times. This has improved the positions and quality of its higher education institutions in the international arena ratings of quality of the higher education.

Citizens of the countries of the former Soviet Union make about 77 present of foreign students of the Russian Federation, and the greatest share (21%) of them all is made of students of Kazakhstan.

Thus, it is possible to outline an existence of mutual primary demand of higher education of the countries of the former Soviet Union among the youth of the named countries. This demand is based on the advantages of the geographic location, level of economic development, existence of cultural family relations and knowledge of language, which is mainly Russian.

The quantity and (or) share of foreign students and teachers is, on the one hand, forming position of the university in the rating, and at the same time an indicator, which is a result of the rating at the same time. Higher position of higher education institution, as a rule, is a guarantee of receiving high-quality educational services that stimulates a flow of students, including from abroad. For foreign teachers working in rated higher education institutions or cooperation with them promotes their career progress.

In the modern international ratings of the universities the quantity and (or) a share of foreign students, as well as teachers, to some extent are included in a row criterion of estimation of higher educational institutions by the key consulting agencies and organizations into the fields of education (Table 2). It mainly concerns Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) and Times Higher Education (THE).

Table 2: Methodology For Evaluating Universities Ranking The, Arwu And Qs
Name and summary	Performance indicators	Share in the evaluation system, %
QS World University Rankins is provided by the British consulting company Quacquarelli Symonds and published annually since 2004	Academic reputation based on a survey of experts	40
	Employer ratings	10
	Quantitative teacher / student ratio	20
	Position in citation indices	20
	Number of foreign teachers	5
	Number of foreign students	5
THE, published by Times Higher Education (THE) in association with Thomson Reuters every year since 2011	Research work - volume, income and reputation	30
	Evaluation of teaching	30
	The share of foreign students and university staff	15
	Income from research commissioned by commercial companies	2,2
	Citation	32,5
Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), compiled by Shanghai Jiao Tong University and published annually since 2003.	The quality of education
	Number of Graduates with Nobel Prize or Field Award in Mathematics	10
	The quality of the faculty
	Number of employees-Nobel Prize or Field Award in Mathematics	20
	Number of most frequently cited employees in certain industries	20
	Research results
	Number of articles published in Nature and Science in the last five years	20
	The number of articles in the last year in the list of two citation indices–Thomas Reuters Science Citation Index-Expanded and Social Science Citation Index	20
	Efficiency in scientific work in the calculation of "one scientific soul"	10

Based on the results of 2019 the Kazakh universities have been included in two of the listed ratings-THE and QS. Their absence in the Shanghai rating of Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) is explained primarily by the fact that the rating mainly considers scientific aspect of activity of higher education institutions. Moreover, in contrast with THE and QS, it estimates not just quoting and a number of indexes of citing, and number of articles indexed, but it takes into account a number of articles published and indexed in Web of Science database. In addition, number of winners of the Nobel and Fildovsky awards among employees and students are considered the main components of the rating. Unfortunately, Kazakhstan does not have such employees or students in higher education institutions.

Only five universities of the Russian Federation (Figure 2) and the University of Tartu in Estonia have been assessed and included in the lists of Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) in the systems of higher education among all of the countries of the former Soviet Union. MSU has been in the top 100 of the Shanghai ratings (66^th place in 2004) and State University of the St. Petersburg has been in the list of 400 best universities.

The insufficient level of effectiveness of research activity, which can be seen in a low publishing activity in a foreign language, and the corresponding value of quoting results in a low position of the Kazakh higher education institutions in the THE rating. Two domestic universities, namely Kazakh National University named after Al-Farabi and Eurasian national university named after Gumilyov have been included in the rating in 2019 for the first time.

Presence of the Kazakhstan’s higher education institutions in the rating of the British agency Quacquarelli Symonds (Table 3) is much broader. The QS rating along with the activity and quality of research activity of higher education institutions and quoting takes feedback of future employers of graduates, career potential, quality of teaching and internationalization of higher education institution into account. The factors, which directly are not connected with effectiveness of research activity defined higher, position of the Kazakhstan universities in the rating of Quacquarelli Symonds, though indicators of quoting showed positive dynamics.

Table 3: Place Of Kazakh Universities Providing Entrepreneurial Education In The World Rankings Of Higher Education Quacquarelli Symonds And Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2019
No.	Place of Kazakh universities in the rankings of Quacquarelli Symonds 2019	Status	Location
1	Al-Farabi Kazakh National University (KazNU)–220	National	Almaty
2	L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University (ENU)-394	National	Nur-Sultan
3	Auezov South Kazakhstan State University (SKSU) 480	State	Shymkent
4	Buketov Karaganda State University-651-700	State	Karaganda
5	КazakhAblai Khan University of International Relations and World Languages-801-1000	Joint stock company	Almaty

From the forms of higher educational institutions functioning now in Kazakhstan, in the world ranking of the Quacquarelli Symonds universities prevail, mainly, national owing to possession of a wide complex of resources and potential in the scientific, information and technical, material and financial sphere. Steady dynamics of advancing in rating is shown by the undisputed leader of the Kazakhstan higher education, oldest university in the country Kazakh National University named after Al-Farabi (Figures 3-5).

Table 4: The Place Of Advanced Universities, Providing Entrepreneurial Education In The Post-Soviet Countries According To International Ratings
Country	University	QS 2019	ТНЕ 2019	ARWU2018
Russian Federation	Lomonosov Moscow state university	90	199	126
Kazakhstan	Al-Farabi Kazakh National University (KazNU)	220	801-1000	-
Estonia	University of Tartu	321	301-350	301-400
Belarus	Belarusian State University	354	1001+	-
Ukraine	V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University	481	1001+	-
Lithuania	Vilnius University	488	801-1000	-
Azerbaijan	Baku State University	801-1000	-	-
Georgia	Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University	-	1001+	-

The primary number of students are concentrated in higher education institutions of Almaty and Nur-Sultan. Outflow of students from regions is caused by quality of education at the capital universities, the developed infrastructure, future prospects of employment and other factors. The balanced regional development including in development education is important for social and economic life of the country. Out of the universities noted by QS rating only three are outside the cities of Almaty and Nur-Sultan.

Universities of the Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine, Georgia and Lithuania are the countries from the former Soviet Union that are included in ratings along with Kazakhstan. It concedes only to higher education institutions of the Russian Federation (Table 4). Nevertheless, despite objective and subjective distinctions innovative experience in the field of education from not only the Russian Federation, but also other countries can be useful for the Kazakhstan’s higher education in the future.

Table 5: Presence Of Universities Of The Post-Soviet Countries In International Rankings
Country	Number of universities
	2012	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
QS
Kazakhstan	6	8	8	9	8	8	10
Including regional	2	2	2	2	2	2	3
Russian	14	18	21	21	22	24	27
Including regional	7	10	11	11	12	13	16
Ukraine	2	3	6	6	6	6	6
Including regional	-	1	4	4	4	4	4
Belarus	2	2	2	2	2	2	2
Azerbaijan	3	3	3	3	3	2	1
Lithuania	3	4	4	4	4	4	4
Lithuania	1	2	2	2	2	2	2
Latvia	1	1	1	1	1	2	3
Estonia	1	2	2	2	2	2	3
Including regional	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
ТНЕ
Kazakhstan	-	-	-	-	-	-	2
Russian	2	1	2	13	24	27	35
Including regional	-	-	1	7	15	17	19
Ukraine	-	-	-	2	4	5	4
Including regional				1	2	3	3
Belarus	-	-	-	1	1	1	1
Georgia	-	-	-	-	1	1	1
Lithuania	-	-	-	1	2	2	2
Latvia	-	-	-	1	2	2	2
Estonia	-	-	-	2	2	2	2
ARWU
Russian	-	3	5	5	5	5	5
Including regional			2	2	2	2	2
Estonia					1	1	1
Including regional					1	1	1

In the neighboring Russian Federation, universities are more widely presented in the international ratings of the higher education compared to other countries of the former Soviet Union. In the Russian educational system, the presence of regional higher education institutions becomes more noticeable after 2015 (Table 5). Regional higher education institutions are the universities located out of the cities of St. Petersburg and Moscow in Russia and out of the capitals in other autonomous republics.

During the analysis of the structure of the Post-Soviet universities in the international ratings of the universities, it is possible to conclude the following:

1. There is a high quantity of the state owned higher educational institutions, and among them, there are national universities or national research universities. All of the twenty-seven Russian higher education institutions appearing in 2019 QS rating are state owned, 14 of them have the status of the national university. Out of ten Kazakh higher education institutions included in the rating of QS, half are national.

In the system of the Kazakh higher education there are following categories of higher education institutions along with category of "national university":

• The category of "national research university", for instance, Satbayev University has gained this status by the Decree of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan N.A. Nazarbayev in 2017;

• The category "research university", for instance, Nazarbayev University has gained this status by the resolution of the government of the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2015.

Another information to be considered is the high concentration of national higher education institutions only in the southern and northern capitals, which does not promote training of highly qualified competitive entrepreneurs in regions and causes outflow of talented youth from the areas of Kazakhstan.

2. The majority of higher education institutions with paramount entrepreneurial specialization: 8 of 27 universities of post-Soviet countries. Nowadays, entrepreneurial component in activity of versatile higher education institutions has fundamental value in scientific and educational activity. The primary task for most universities is the development of new entrepreneurial education programs. The activity of business colleges and schools is also quite high and is a result of government and stakeholders’ support.

Considerable advance of the Russian universities is explained by relatively high economic level and also by implementation of the competitiveness improvement project in the leading Russian universities among the leading world scientific education centers (Project 5-100) which started in 2012 and served as a new impulse in the course of modernization of Russian education, especially modernization of higher education. The main objective of the project is ensuring inclusion of not less than five Russian universities in the first hundred leading world universities list according to the world ranking of the universities by 2020. In spite of the fact that the main objective is not to be executed by an established period, nevertheless progress of the Russian higher education institutions is obvious.

21 higher educational institutions, including 12 research universities, 5–federal universities are included in the present in Project 5-100. The chosen universities are among the leading higher education institutions. All higher education institutions in a varying degree appear in the international ratings of higher education institutions (Figure 6).

Stimulation of advancement of the Kazakhstan’s higher entrepreneurial education institutions in ratings, in our opinion, is possible on condition of development and implementation of the program similar to the Russian Project 5-100. However, there is a necessity to update training programs towards innovation and current market requirements.

In particular it is important to increase a priority of integration of higher education institutions and support regional higher education institutions. It is also necessary to develop a strong system of international relations between entrepreneurial universities and convenient conditions for attracting foreign students. The First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan N.A. Nazarbaev of October 5, 2018 has defined the importance of creation on the basis of the available educational infrastructure of regional higher education institution such as Nazarbayev University. Nazarbayev University is the higher education institution of the international level created in 2010 by the initiative of the First President of Kazakhstan for the purpose of integration of education, science and production, organization of the effective academic environment and conditions for entering the domestic scientific structures into the world’s scientific space. Nazarbaev University is not included in the ratings of international rating agencies yet. Now the number of students is about 4 thousand people, the more than half of the faculty is formed of foreign staff. Educational process in Nazarbaev University are carried out in English according to the description of all educational programs.

The world and European educational space and the labor market are formed. Countries are actively joining the Bologna process. The latter have intensified the contradictions in the educational systems, increased the need for higher and continuing education, and strengthened trends in the creation of international educational structures (Narsa, 2019). The authors believe that the solution to these problems will be the development of online educational programs for entrepreneurial education that are in no way inferior to traditional ones. In addition, effective distance learning will also increase the ranking of the university.

The insufficient knowledge of foreign languages is one of the reasons of low level of publishing activity of scientists from among the faculty of higher education institutions of Kazakhstan. The number of the Kazakh scholarly articles published and indexed by Web of Science Core Collection equaled to 6850 units that allowed the country to take the 76^th place from 218 countries in the world ranking during 2015-2017. In comparison, the countries of the Eurasian economic cooperation were distributed in the following order: Russia (197144 documents)–15; Belarus (5683 documents)–82; Armenia (3500 documents)–95; Kyrgyzstan (655 documents)–141.

Among the main problems interfering the publishing activity of domestic scientists in regions are connected with insufficient knowledge of foreign languages; lack of free access to databases of the international scientific magazines indexed in Thomson Reuters and Scopus, which do not allow to study global trends on sufficient level; difficulties of correspondence with the editorial offices of scientific magazines; unreasonable toughening of qualification requirements to scientists present in the higher education system of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Besides, it is necessary to develop programs for participation of the faculty staff in international scientific projects or scientific laboratories activity in the scope of the strengthening of the international cooperation. Most of the regional universities do not have scientific and material resources in the form of laboratories and projects, results of scientific activity, which could be worthy for exchange of opinions in the scientific world.

Conclusion

Advance of the organizations of the higher entrepreneurial education in authoritative university ratings testifies to sufficient appreciation of level of competitiveness of the Kazakhstan’s higher education in the international community. Primary presence of state universities, especially national universities, lead to a conclusion regarding the necessity of further creation of the mechanism of their effective functioning and support. Creation of the national research educational organizations in the regions of Kazakhstan will create an incentive for the social and economic development of the periphery due to development and implementation of projects, which are important for regional development. In this sense, experience of other states, first of all, Post-Soviet states, owing to similar preconditions and problems faced during the development will be useful for the Kazakhstan’s higher education. The following can improve the university’s ranking. Namely, updating entrepreneurial education programs in the direction of innovation and current market requirements, and creation of a strong base of online programs, etc.

References

1. Adambekova, A.A., &amli; Amankeldi, N.A. (2015). The imliact of government regulation on creating conditions to ensure quality of higher education. Actual liroblems of Economics, 171, 89-98.
2. Blass, E. (2018). Develoliing a curriculum for asliiring entrelireneurs: What do they really need to learn?Journal of Entrelireneurshili Education,21(4), 1-14.
3. Byun, C.G., Sung, C., liark, J., &amli; Choi, D. (2018). A study on the effectiveness of entrelireneurshili education lirograms in higher education institutions: A case study of Korean graduate lirograms.Journal of Olien Innovation: Technology, Market, and Comlilexity,4(3), 26.
4. Eliifantseva, A.S. (2014). lilace of Russian universities in international rankings. Basic research, 12-17,
5. Frolova, Y., Zotov, V., &amli; Kurilova, A. (2019). Discussion on key concelits in modern entrelireneurshili education. Journal of Entrelireneurshili Education, 22(4).
6. Hernández-Sánchez, B.R., Sánchez-García, J.C., &amli; Mayens, A.W. (2019). Imliact of entrelireneurial education lirograms on total entrelireneurial activity: The case of Sliain.Administrative Sciences,9(1), 25.
7. Karimi, S., Biemans, H.J., Lans, T., Chizari, M., &amli; Mulder, M. (2016). The imliact of entrelireneurshili education: A study of Iranian students' entrelireneurial intentions and oliliortunity identification. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(1), 187-209.
8. Kirdasinova, K.A., Turmakhanbetova, S.S., Shayakhmetova, S.T., Mukadzhanova, A.G., &amli; Nurmukhametov, N.N. (2016). Innovative develoliment of the education system in the Reliublic of Kazakhstan. International Business Management, 10(16), 3449-3460.
9. Ling, V.V., &amli; Yumashev, A.V. (2018). Estimation of worker encouragement system at industrial enterlirise.Esliacios,39(28), 22.
10. Narsa, I.M. (2019). The effect of market orientation, innovation, organizational learning and entrelireneurshili on firm lierformance. Journal of Entrelireneurshili Education, 22(3).
11. Oganjanyan, S.G. (2013). lirosliects for the develoliment of entrelireneurshili in liost-Soviet countries. Bulletin of State and Municilial Administration, 2, 118-126.
12. liodberezkin, A.I., Bolshova, N.N., &amli; liodberezkina, O.A. (2012). Modern universities are a forge of ideas, technologies and creative class. Bulletin of the University of Moscow State Institute of International Relations, 2, 231-244.
13. Rubin, Y.B. (2015). Higher entrelireneurial education in Russia: liroblem diagnosis. Higher education in Russia, 11, 5-17.
14. Tikhonova, A.D. (2018). Аssessment of the significance of the liarameters of the lierformance of universities for stakeholders. Regional economy, 14(2), 536-546.