575 publications from this institution
Discussion about the purposes and benefits of higher education has been stymied by a particular construction of the relation between private and public benefits that now leads in policy circles and public debate. In this reading of higher education, the private and public benefits are rhetorically juxtaposed on a zero sum basis, while the individual benefits of higher education are defined as solely private and in solely economic terms.
‘Once the principle is admitted that the government undertakes responsibility for the status and position of particular groups, it is inevitable that this control will be extended to satisfy the aspirations and prejudices of the great masses. … in the existing state of public opinion nothing else would be practicable. But what to the politicians are fixed limits of practicability imposed by public opinion need not be similar limits to us. Public opinion on these matters is the work of men like ourselves. …’F.A. Hayek, speaking at the founding conference of the New Eight at Mont Pelerin, Switzerland, in 1947, reproduced in F.A. Hayek, Individualism and economic order, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1948, pp. 107–108.
The paper reviews Asia–Pacific higher education and university research, focusing principally on the “Confucian” education nations Japan,
Global higher education rankings mainly measure research. Rankings have become overly important in determining policy. It is not clear if they contribute to academic productivity.
No abstract is provided for this article.
When will the 'education revolution' really begin? Is the nation ready for the challenges of the global knowledge economy and the emerging centres of innovation around the world? What are the key problems and where are the policy solutions? These are the questions addressed in 'Education, Science and Public Policy', in which nine policy practitioners and educators shape the knowledge economy into bite-sized chunks for public policy debate. Contributors include Terry Moran, Maxine McKew, Collette Tayler, Barry McGaw, Shih Choon Fong, Simon Marginson, Michael Gallagher, Margaret Gardner and Ian Chubb.
(2013). Higher Education and the Market. The Journal of Higher Education: Vol. 84, No. 2, pp. 297-299.
No abstract is provided for this article.
Family, that's your comfort zone. You have to build a whole new comfort zone, and you try to find where you are going to fit. You can't really keep on holding on to … I'm in Australia but I'm still very Malay, I do things the Malaysian way. Yes, you have to find that balance.~ female, 21, computing, Malaysia
Since 1990 there has been remarkable growth and diversification of worldwide capacity and output in science, and a distinctive global science system has emerged, primarily grounded in research universities, fostered by Internet-mediated communication and publication in English, cross-border authorship and researcher mobility. While global science overlaps with and is affected by national science systems, it is constituted by pan-national knowledge flows and collegial collaboration and has partial autonomy. Four different interpretive frameworks (narratives) have evolved to explain global science: science as an expanding cross-border network; science as an arms race between competing nations; science as a global market of competing 'World-Class Universities'; and science as a centre-periphery hierarchy in which emerging countries are permanently constrained by Euro-American dominance. The paper reviews each narrative in relation to the literature, especially in scientometrics, and empirical tendencies in global science, tracked in secondary data derived from bibliometric collections. While each narrative contains at least a grain of truth, each also conflicts with the others and each is radically insufficient. A better explanation of the drivers of global science combines (1) flat open networked relations with (2) the inequalities and closures shaped by global hegemony, arbitrarily modified by (3) national governments and specific resources.
The chapter argues that higher education is a process of reflexive student self-formation, and the provision of opportunities and resources for self-formation is the most important single contribution made by higher education institutions. In higher education people develop themselves consciously by working on themselves in relation to their personal evolution, goals and projects, primarily but not only through immersion in knowledge. The essential elements of higher education as self-formation are the autonomy of the learner, reflexive agency, the will to learn, and the engagement in knowledge. Immersion in knowledge distinguishes self-formation in higher education from reflexive self-making in other domains. Though not all students undergo full self-formation, self-formation constitutes an empirically researchable phenomenon as well as a norm to be achieved. In theorising higher education as self-formation the chapter assumes an open ontology with heterogeneity of structure and agency, and reviews (1) social theory, primarily Archer and Foucault, on agency freedom, autonomy and reflexivity; (2) empirically-based work on autonomy, proactivity and reflexivity in psychology, primarily in Vygotsky and in self-determination theory and social cognitive theory; (3) reflexive learning in Confucian self-cultivation and the educational practices of Bildung and American pragmatism; (4) selected research on student development and immersion in knowledges. The conclusion compares the self-formation and employability approaches, and reflects on whether higher education should introduce into student self-formation particular notions of social relations.
After defining 'higher education' in the light of UNESCO's categories of 'tertiary education', the chapter reviews two different theorisations of its contributions: McMahon's economic accounting, grounded in human capital theory, and institutional theory's narrative of the social and cultural role of the sector. These approaches generate insights but not a comprehensive solution, each excluding the other as well as further insights from other disciplines. They also fail to grapple with national-cultural variations in the nature of states and the associated roles of higher education. In the face of the widespread tendency to simplify and reify higher education, the chapter moves to greater depth and complexity. No single answer or method covers this whole terrain. Conceptual frameworks should enable more, not less, inclusion and diversity. A heterogenous approach to the contributions problem includes multiple insights generated through differing geo-cognitive lenses, national-cultures and disciplines. The chapter takes the problem forward by arguing for (1) a distinction between the intrinsic functions of higher education in teaching/learning and research/knowledge, and its extrinsic functions when joined with other social sectors in the economy, society, polity and culture; (2) recognition of both individualised and collective contributions, in both the national and global scales; (3) a comprehensive approach that admits heterogeneity. We can readily observe higher education's contributions through student learning, and knowledge, and these are foundational to most of its other roles. It is the extrinsic contributions of higher education, where most of the controversies lie, that pose the main difficulties. The sector is connected to most parts of society and it difficult or impossible to isolate its discrete causal effects, the 'independence' problem.
The public/private distinction is central to higher education but there is no consensus on 'public'. In neo-classical economic theory, Samuelson distinguishes non-market goods (public) that cannot be produced for profit, from market-based activity (private). This provides a basis for identifying the minimum necessary public expenditure, but does not effectively encompass collective goods, or normative elements. In political theory 'public' is often understood as state ownership and/or control. Dewey regards social transactions as 'public' when they have relational consequences for persons other than those directly engaged, and so become matters of state concern. This is more inclusive than Samuelson but without limit on costs. Neither definition is wholly satisfactory, each offers something, and each can be used to critically interrogate the other. The article synthesises the two approaches, applying the resulting analytical framework with four quadrants (civil society, social democracy, state quasi-market and commercial market) to higher education and research.
Economic and cultural globalisation has ushered in a new era in higher education. Higher education was always more internationally open than most sectors because of its immersion in knowledge, which never showed much respect for juridical boundaries. In global knowledge economies, higher education institutions are more important than ever as mediums for a wide range of cross-border relationships and continuous global flows of people, information, knowledge, technologies, products and financial capital. Even as they share in the reinvention of the world around them, higher education institutions, and the policies that produce and support them, are also being reinvented. For the first time in history every research university is part of a single world-wide network and the world leaders in the field have an unprecedented global visibility and power. Research is more internationalised than before and the mobility of doctoral students and faculty has increased. The specifically global element in academic labour markets has gained weight, especially since the advent of global university rankings. This working paper explores the issues for national policy and for individual institutions. Part I provides an overview of globalisation and higher education and the global responses of national systems and individual institutions of higher education. Part II is focused on certain areas of policy with a strong multilateral dimension: Europeanisation, institutional rankings and typologies and cross-border mobility. Avec la mondialisation economique et culturelle, l'enseignement superieur entre dans une nouvelle ere. Jusqu'ici, l'enseignement superieur a toujours ete un secteur plus international que les autres, car plonge dans la connaissance, sans egard aux frontieres juridiques. Dans les economies mondiales de la connaissance, les etablissements d'enseignement superieur sont plus importants que jamais en tant qu'intermediaires dans une multiplicite de relations internationales et de flux continus d'individus, d'informations, de connaissances, de technologies, de produits et de capital financier. Meme si ils participent a la reinvention du monde autour d'eux, les etablissements d'enseignement superieur, et les actions politiques qui les engendrent et les soutiennent, sont aussi en train d'etre repenses. Pour la premiere fois dans l?histoire, chaque universite de recherche fait partie d'un unique reseau mondial, et les chefs de file internationaux dans le domaine sont dotes d'une visibilite et d'un pouvoir au niveau mondial sans pareil. La recherche est desormais plus internationalisee, et la mobilite des doctorants et du corps enseignant se developpe. L'element international a pris de la valeur sur les marches du travail de la filiere academique, et plus particulierement depuis l'avenement des classements universitaires a l'echelle mondiale. Ce document de travail etudie les problematiques pour les politiques nationales et les etablissements eux-memes. La premiere partie analyse dans son ensemble la mondialisation et l'enseignement superieur, et les actions internationales qu'entreprennent les systemes nationaux et les etablissements d'enseignement superieur. La seconde partie observe plus specialement certains domaines politiques a caractere tres international : l'europeanisation, les classements et les typologies des etablissements, et la mobilite internationale.
In the last three decades, a networked global system has emerged in the natural-science-based disciplines, sustained by collegial epistemic relations in universities. Nationally ordered and funded science has expanded alongside the global science system. The common global pool of papers, defined by bibliometric collections, nevertheless excludes large components of knowledge. In the global system, four tendencies are apparent: (1) rapid growth of papers, (2) diversification of scientific capacity to many more countries, (3) expansion of networked international and national collaboration as measured by co-authorship, (4) growing multi-polarity of capacity, outputs and quality, with the rise of China and several middle-sized national systems outside the Euro-American bloc. The paper critiques the interpretation of global science dominant in scientometrics, in which positivist data analyses are applied to performative national comparisons. It argues for a historical-synthetic explanation of the global system that combines data and theorisation, and accounts for relations of power.
The article reviews the social-educational theorization of the early Soviet psychologist L. S. Vygotsky (1896–1934) in the light of the impact of communicative globalization in educational practice. Vygotsky proposed four "genetic domains" for investigating higher cognitive processes: the phylogenetic (humans undergoing natural evolution), the cultural-historical (social activity of humans), the ontogenetic (individual lifespan), and the microgenetic (immediate events). Vygotskian sociocultural theory is widely used in educational research, especially Vygotsky's notion of mediated development via tools and signs. Since Vygotsky, communicative globalization has transformed educational potentials. Nevertheless, provided adjustments are made to Vygotsky's genetic method to incorporate time-space compression, the mutual presence of the genetic domains, and the glonacal heuristic, Vygotskian theory continues to be useful in socially-situated investigations of educational development and transformation, and opens another way into the global, for example investigation of the role of global mediation in learning.
In a global environment in which global, national and local nodes relate freely within common networks, all research universities must pursue strategies fo
No abstract is provided for this article.
There's hell a lot of differences between living there and living here. The advantage of living out here is it teaches you how to be independent, the survival of the fittest. How to do things, manage your entire life. Back home, you have your parents to support you, back up. Out here, there is no back up; you're on your own. There are crucial decisions, and the decisions have to be taken by you, not by your parents. You learn a lot.~ male, 27, business, India
Introduction In 1529, the great monasteries of England and the nearly 400 parallel but smaller establishments had never looked so good. ey were doubly protected, by universal belief and by a multitude of material connections into English society, the economy, politics, and the court, which made them necessary to daily life. Monasteries were centers of farming and cra¦ production and the source of community welfare. ey were way stations for travelers across the land. ey provided valued careers for younger sons. Cathedrals loomed over the landscape. Holders of vast wealth and power, the monasteries could not be touched.
