This article analyzes strategies for improving the quality of teaching Russian as a Foreign Language (RFL) at the university level. It identifies the limitations of traditional grammar-translation methods and advocates for a holistic, systemic shift. This includes integrating communicative language teaching (CLT), digital technologies, and deep socio-cultural immersion. The discussion emphasizes that quality enhancement depends on institutional support for modern teacher training, flexible curricula tailored to Language for Specific Purposes (LSP), and the implementation of authentic assessment methods that measure true communicative and intercultural competence.

Russian as a Foreign Language (RFL), higher education, quality improvement, communicative competence, pedagogy, technology-enhanced learning, teacher training, intercultural competence, assessment.

Al-Tamimi, A., & Attamneh, R. M. (2018). The effectiveness of using authentic materials in developing the communicative competence of EFL university students. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 7(4), 119-124. https://doi.org.10.7575/aiac.ijael.v.7n.4p.119

Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Multilingual Matters.

Gural, S. K., & Smokotin, V. M. (2015). Foreign language teaching in a university setting as a means of developing a multicultural and multilingual linguistic identity. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 200, 147-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.037

Klimova, I. I. (2015). Case study of project-based learning in teaching Russian as a foreign language. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 206, 200-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.009

Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge University Press.

Sysoev, P. V. (2010). The integration of "culture" and "Internet" into ELT. ELT Journal, 64(3), 307-318. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp072

Vdovina, E., & Gaibaryan, O. (2016). Teaching Russian for specific purposes at the university level. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 236, 286-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.12.029