The State Duma is considering a legislative change that would alter admissions to master’s programs nationwide. Published on the State Duma website on April 29, the draft bill comes from a group of deputies led largely by members of the ruling United Russia party. Its central rule would prevent students from starting a master’s program in an area that is not linked to their undergraduate major or to their documented professional experience. Proponents argue the measure is aimed at strengthening the depth and quality of postgraduate training by reducing cross-field transitions.
Supporters of the measure highlight instances where students with degrees in one discipline move straight into an unrelated two-year postgraduate course and struggle to catch up. The drafters say this pattern appears often enough to undermine program standards and graduate competence. The authors point to specific combinations such as graduates in economics or law entering Chemical Technology programs, and mathematics or chemistry graduates moving into Law. They say these mismatches create gaps in essential preparatory knowledge that two-year master’s courses are not designed to fix.
How the proposed restriction would work
Under the proposal, institutions would be required to check applicants’ academic records and relevant employment history before admitting them to a master’s program outside their field. The bill seeks to make prior study or work experience a baseline eligibility criterion, limiting the practice of open cross-disciplinary recruitment. Lawmakers argue that an abbreviated postgraduate timeline means students cannot develop the foundational competencies if they lack necessary undergraduate coursework. The drafters frame this as a quality-control measure intended to ensure master’s graduates have disciplinary depth rather than superficial breadth.
The lawmakers and their stated concerns
The bill lists its primary authors, including Alexander Mazhuga, who serves as first deputy chairman of the State Duma’s Committee on Science and Higher Education and is a United Russia member. He is joined by other deputies from United Russia as well as one deputy each from A Just Russia, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. The explanatory materials submitted with the draft emphasize that short postgraduate programs cannot serve as substitutes for missing undergraduate foundations, creating a risk that graduates will enter the workforce without necessary core skills.
Examples lawmakers cite
To illustrate their point, the authors cite enrollment patterns that they say are mismatched to program needs. In two disciplines singled out in the proposal, incoming cohorts reportedly include sizable shares of students without prior training: around one in five entrants to Chemical Technology programs and about one in four entrants to Law programs lack a relevant educational background. The bill’s sponsors use these proportions to argue that institutions face recurring cohorts who require remedial instruction not compatible with a standard two-year master’s curriculum.
Numbers and broader context
The deputies base part of their case on official enrollment statistics. Citing Rosstat data for 2026, they note that more than 610,000 students were enrolled in master’s programs, with program attendance split across formats: full-time study accounted for 55 percent of enrollments, remote learning for 33 percent, and mixed formats for 12 percent. These figures are used to show the scale of postgraduate education and to argue that even a relatively small share of cross-field entrants represents a substantial number of students nationally.
Implications for universities and applicants
If adopted, the measure could require institutions to overhaul admission procedures and verification practices, and it might limit options for applicants seeking to change career trajectories. Universities would need clear policies for assessing whether a candidate’s prior coursework or job experience satisfies the new eligibility criteria. Critics may warn this could reduce flexibility for career changers, while proponents contend it would protect program integrity and graduate competency by ensuring that master’s studies build on an appropriate base.
Translation note and how to follow the coverage
At Meduza, our newsroom explains how content is prepared: this article was developed by a human journalist and translated from Russian using an AI model that has been tuned to meet editorial standards. An editor reviews every translation before publication. If readers spot problems in the English version, please contact us at [email protected]. To receive Meduza’s exclusive English content regularly, consider subscribing to our newsletter for ongoing updates and analysis.
