However, the introduction of a new system of enrollment in the HEI and the system of distribution of public procurement between them did not provide the expected increase in the quality of education. This is evidenced by the results of assessing the level of secondary education in Ukraine by international institutions, and the reduction over the past ten years of average scores of external examination certificates in mathematics and Ukrainian language and literature by 7–8 %.

Focus on successful test tasks has a significant side effect. The fact is that the successful completion of testing does not indicate a systematic mastery of the entrant of this particular subject, but demonstrates the formation of a certain database. Thus, it does not develop the ability to use the learned material to solve practical problems, not to mention the ability to synthesize new knowledge. This is not the fault of the applicants, as no one has set them a task or taught them to solve practical problems, let alone synthesize new knowledge. They were given the task to learn to perform test tasks within the EIT, and motivated and able students learned it.

In-depth study of any subject requires students not only a good memory, but also the ability to think systematically. This ability is based on the relevant abilities of a particular individual and is formed and improved in the learning process.

However, the system of education, which is aimed only at the successful completion of the EIT, does not help to improve the ability to think systematically, and at best leaves it at the same level that the individual inherited. Therefore, the monograph proposes an approach that will launch a mechanism of self-organization that will direct the most able students to the systematic mastery of certain disciplines, and not only to successful testing within the EIT.

With regard to the selection of entrants to study at universities, the author believes that two interrelated but not identical components of the integral characteristics of personality should be considered. It is easy to distinguish the first of them as academic or cognitive abilities that allow to effectively acquire knowledge. Then the second component characterizes the ability of an individual to creatively use this knowledge in practice and achieve success in life.

The first component of each personality is described by its cognitive-intellectual portrait, while the second – emotional-intellectual portrait.

The practice of evaluating the components of the first portrait of the individual has a long history and established methods. The monograph uses the method of determining the structure of intelligence of R. Amthauer and the method of creativity of E. Torrens. In addition, to assess the cognitive and intellectual abilities of entrants used the «competitive score» of the entrant, which was calculated on the basis of the scores of its EIT certificates.

Calculations have shown that all components of the cognitive-intellectual portrait to some extent affect the learning outcomes of the student at the university. However, the most indicative is the «competitive score» of the entrant. Its size when entering the university reliably predicts the level of success of a particular entrant in the learning process. Thus, the in- clusion of the «competition score» as a component of the cognitive-intellectual portrait of the student is justified.