International Perspectives on Higher Education: Challenging Values and Practice 9781441102034, 9781350091184, 9781441100351

Citation preview

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Also available from Continuum Globalization and Internationalization in Higher Education, edited by Felix Maringe and Nick Foskett International Perspectives on Higher Education, edited by Chau Meng Huat and Trevor Kerry Interpretive Pedagogies for Higher Education, Jon Nixon Meeting the Challenges of Change in Postgraduate Education, edited by Trevor Kerry Towards Teaching in Public, edited by Mike Neary, Howard Stevenson and Les Bell

International Perspectives on Higher Education Challenging Values and Practice Edited by Trevor Kerry

Continuum International Publishing Group The Tower Building 80 Maiden Lane 11 York Road Suite 704 London SE1 7NX New York NY 10038 www.continuumbooks.com © Trevor Kerry and Contributors, 2012 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Trevor Kerry and Contributors have asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this work. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: 978-1-4411-0035-1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data International perspectives on higher education : challenging values and practice / edited by Trevor Kerry. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-4411-0203-4 -- ISBN 1-4411-0203-5 1. Education, Higher--Cross-cultural studies. 2. Comparative education. I. Kerry, Trevor. LB2322.2.I63 2012 378--dc23 2012003512 Typeset by Fakenham Prepress Solutions, Fakenham, Norfolk NR21 8NN

Contents

List of Tables and Figures

vii

Author Biographies

viii

Introduction The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity Trevor Kerry

1

Part 1: Ethics, Freedom and Spirituality

23

Chapter 1 The Ethics of Higher Education: Maintaining Ethical Standards in the Twenty-first Century University Trevor Kerry

25

Chapter 2 Academic Freedom: A Medieval Concept for a Twenty-first Century University? Trevor Kerry and Carolle Kerry

50

Chapter 3

Religion and Spirituality in Student Life Tom Sherwood

69

Part 2: Leadership and Management

87

Chapter 4 Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University: Hard Choices and Effective Management Muriel Robinson

89

Chapter 5 Internationalization and Globalization: Implications for Higher Education Learning and Teaching Terfot A. Ngwana and Fengshu Liu

106

Chapter 6 Curricular Design and Assessment: Moving Towards a Global Template Kent Löfgren

127

Chapter 7 International Experience for Students: The Evansville/ Harlaxton Model 142 Gordon Kingsley

viii Contents

Part 3: Learning and Teaching

155

Chapter 8

157

The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited Christina Hughes and Malcolm Tight

Chapter 9 Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University 172 Paul Bacsich Chapter 10

A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning Rosie LeCornu

Postscript:

Parallel Universes in Higher Education 220 Trevor Kerry with ‘Emma’

198

Index of Names 231 Index

235

List of Tables and Figures

Table Table 6.1 Key Dates and Actions Taken at the Local Level at Umeå University, Sweden, During 2005–2007

133

Figure Figure 7.1 Learning: All Together

148

Author Biographies

Paul Bacsich was at the Open University, UK, for many years including as Head of the Electronic Media Research Group (one of the founding parts of the Knowledge Media Institute). He started his research on virtual universities in 1994. In 1996 he was appointed Professor of Telematics at Sheffield Hallam University, UK, where he set up the Virtual Campus and the Telematics in Education Research Group. After that he consulted via his company Matic Media Ltd, and was Director of Special Projects at the UK e-University. Later, he took on long-term consultancies on benchmarking and change management in e-learning for the Higher Education Academy. He is also Senior Consultant at Sero Consulting Ltd, where he successfully bid for and now runs two large Lifelong Learning Programme projects in virtual schools and in open educational resources respectively. In addition he is Visiting Professor at Middlesex University, UK. He has university clients in England, Wales and Sweden and research collaborators in many countries. Christina Hughes is Chair of the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Warwick, UK. Her research is concerned with the development of feminist theory and its applications in the fields of gender and education and work and employment. She was founding Co-Chair of the Gender and Education Association and currently serves on the Board of Gender, Work and Organisation. Christina also has longstanding interests in research methodology. Her latest publication, co-edited with R Cohen, Feminism Counts: Quantitative Methods and Researching Gender, was published by Taylor and Francis in 2011. Carolle Kerry graduated from the Open University, UK, and took her doctorate at the University of Lincoln, UK, in the area of head teacher performance management. She has served for a long period as primary school governor, vice-chair and chair; and gained the Fellowship of the College of Teachers in school governance. Carolle has contributed journal articles to Education Today, Managing Schools Today, Curriculum, and Gifted



Author Biographies

xi

Education International. She was co-author of The Blackwell Handbook of Education with Michael Farrell and Trevor Kerry. Her employment was with Local Authorities and while working at the PR department at Norfolk County Council, UK, she edited the Norfolk County Guide. Trevor Kerry is the first Emeritus Professor in the University of Lincoln, UK, and Visiting Professor at Bishop Grosseteste University College, UK. He was Professor of Education, a Senior Vice-President and Dean of the College of Teachers, UK. He chairs the Governing Body at Brooke Weston Academy, UK. He has taught in all phases of education, and has written or edited more than 30 books and nearly 200 academic articles. He has written several hundred journalistic pieces on politics, social and consumer issues and wildlife (some under pseudonyms). A keen photographer, he was awarded the titles of Honorary Master of Colour by the International Colour Awards (2006 and 2010) and Spider Fellow in Photography by the Spider (Black and White) Awards (2006 and 2011). Gordon Kingsley is principal of Harlaxton College in Harlaxton Village, Lincolnshire, UK. During a long educational career in the USA, he taught literature at Tulane University, Mississippi College, the University of Louisville, and William Jewell College, where he was also successively Dean of the College and President. While in the latter role, he was adjudged, in a study funded by the Exxon Foundation, as among the 5 per cent of America’s ‘most effective collegiate leaders’. He has served on several civic, educational, cultural and church boards at local and national levels, but now finds most satisfaction in a line that sings and a joy that surprises. Rosie Le Cornu is Associate Professor of Teacher Education in the School of Education, University of South Australia, teaching in and coordinating professional experience courses in teacher education. She has worked in this area for over 20 years, collaborating with school-based staff including mentor-teachers, coordinators of pre-service teachers and university colleagues to develop professional learning in professional experience. She has written extensively on professional experience, with publications on peer-mentoring, inclusivity, the use of ICTs, re-culturing and learning communities. She was awarded the Australia Teacher Educator of the Year award 2009 by the Australian Teacher Education Association and Pearson for sustained commitment to innovation and scholarship in professional experience. She is Leader of the Professional Experience Research group in the School of Education and a strong advocate for professional

xii

Author Biographies

experience reform based on the notions of critical reflection, partnerships and reciprocal learning relationships. Kent Löfgren earned his PhD in education in 2001 at Umeå University, Sweden, where he works today as a lecturer and researcher at the Department of Education. His studies have focused on curricula innovation and learning, validity and reliability in assessment and transnational challenges in higher education in Europe. His research interest also comprises ICT and learning, standardized tests (use, outcomes, and validity of), and issues related to defence and security policies. Quantitative and qualitative research methodologies are also high on his personal agenda. In addition, he has also worked as project leader as well as expert/reviewer for the European Commission in education and learning. Fengshu Liu is a researcher at the Institute of Educational Research, University of Oslo, Norway, working on the project ‘Modernization as Lived Experiences: Identity Construction of Three Generations of Young Men and Young Women in China and Norway’ (funded by the Norwegian Research Council, 1 July 2011–1 July 2015). Her recent publications cover topics such as intercultural comparisons of young people and the internet, Chinese urban youth and the internet, youth and the internet Cafe in China, identity construction of China’s onlychild generation, intergenerational relationship in the only-child family, Chinese university students’ construction of the middle-class self, gender and education, rural youth and education in China, and culture and education. Her most recent publications include the book Urban Youth in China: Modernity, the Internet and the Self, which was published by Routledge in 2011. Terfot A. Ngwana is currently a doctoral instructor at the University of Liverpool, UK, for the Laureate Education Professional Doctorate in Education (EdD). He is also a visiting tutor at the Department of Professional Development in Education at Bishop Grosseteste University College in Lincoln, UK. He is a former University Council for Educational Administrators (UCEA) Jackson Scholar, USA, and has been involved in teaching and learning as well as research on higher education within the UK since 2001. His current research interests include critical curriculum studies higher education and continuing professional development in education in general.



Author Biographies

xiii

Muriel Robinson was a primary school teacher for ten years in inner London before completing an MA in Language and Literature in Education and moving into teacher education at the University of Brighton, UK. Whilst there she became interested in the interplay between media and her PhD thesis explored the relationships between reading and television with regard to narrative. After 14 years in a range of roles at Brighton, she was appointed Vice Principal (Academic Quality) of Newman College and then Principal of Bishop Grosseteste University College, Lincoln, UK, from September 2003. Her main research interests still relate to media literacies but she has also developed an interest in leadership through her past and current roles. Tom Sherwood was the Ecumenical Chaplain at Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, until 2009, the only full-time religious professional for a religiously diverse population of 20,000 students. In 2009, he was appointed McGeachy Senior Scholar in the United Church of Canada. He is also an Adjunct Professor of Sociology at Carleton University, Canada, teaching courses on religious diversity and religion in public life, and conducting a major study of the religiosity and spirituality of young adults (http:// campuschaplaincy.ca/category/listening-to-the-echo/). Malcolm Tight is Professor of Higher Education at Lancaster University, UK, having previously worked at the University of Warwick, UK, at Birkbeck College, University of London, UK, and at the Open University, UK. He has been Editor of the leading international journal, Studies in Higher Education, since 1999. His research interests are in mapping the state of higher education research across the world, and in the development of higher education in the UK.

Introduction

The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity Trevor Kerry

The travelator of higher education In one of his novels Arthur C. Clarke builds on an idea from H. G. Wells, who envisaged a time when towns and cities would be equipped with constantly moving walkways. Wells’ (1998) vision of cities was of a myriad faceless people stepping on here, then stepping off at some eventual destination. Clarke took the idea a stage further, with roads that were anchored at either end but flowed at breakneck speed in the intervening space. The world of higher education (HE) seems to be increasingly delineated by moving roadways. But if this vision – with its constant change determined by powerful but unseen mechanisms – is one apt metaphor for HE in the twenty-first century, there is another, more prosaic, model: the sale of the family silver. Universities seem to be bombarded constantly to part with cherished practices, self-images and even standards in order to meet obligations of a financial nature imposed on them by fiscal decisions taken many miles from a campus and in contexts that having nothing to do with education as such. Thus a combination of turbulence and compromise in the face of financial shortfall seems to conspire to define HE today. If that seems like a bleak overview, often it gets bleaker for pursuing the detail.

The very recent history of higher education A brief glimpse at the recent history of universities demonstrates beyond doubt the turbulence that surrounds them. This modern turbulence dates from 1999 when the then Prime Minister Tony Blair announced his intention to see that 50 per cent of all young people aged under 30 should take part in HE by 2010. This expansion process became known

2

International Perspectives on Higher Education

as massification. Specifically, the aim was to increase the participation of those from poorer backgrounds and ethnic minorities. While participation in HE at universities had been historically regarded as around the 5 per cent level, by 2004 it had risen to around 44 per cent (DfES 2004) – exact figures are hard to come by as different sources calculate them differently, but the principle of expansion is established. Yet the picture was not all rosy. Galindo-Ruada et al. (2004) concluded in that same year: The gap between rich and poor, in terms of HE participation, has widened during the 1990s. But is the glass half empty or half full? Children from all socio-economic backgrounds are considerably more likely to go to university in 2001, as compared to 1994. In fact the growth in HE participation amongst poorer students has been remarkably high, mainly because they were starting from such a low base. Nonetheless our results suggest that children from poor neighbourhoods have become relatively less likely to participate in HE since 1994/5, as compared to children from richer neighbourhoods. In fact the strength of the relationship between neighbourhood income levels and HE participation grew most rapidly in the early part of the period, rather than after the introduction of tuition fees. This would seem to imply that any income-driven inequality in HE is part of a longer-term trend, perhaps related to the gradual reduction in student support in HE and the big expansion of the university sector that occurred in the early 1990s. It seems reasonable to conclude, therefore, that while the policy was not failing, neither was it succeeding in the ways intended. It was succeeding in putting up the numbers of students in HE; but a higher proportion of those new HE places was being appropriated by the middle classes than had been the intention. The middle classes – more savvy about the benefits of HE; more familiar with institutions, application procedures and study skills; more committed in the home to aspiration and ambition – had capitalized disproportionately on an innovation intended to benefit the less advantaged. This was, perhaps, illustrated by two parallel trends. First, independent schools still dominated, especially in what were perceived to be the ‘best’ universities (most notably, Oxbridge); and the minority areas of the country where grammar schools still hold sway were rewarded by high acceptance rates (a staggering 89.1 per cent) of pupils into HE (BBC News 2005). The Sutton Trust (2008), which is committed to redressing this imbalance, noted:



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

3

The study – University admissions by individual schools – is the first to analyse in detail admission rates between 2002 and 2006 for 3,700 individual schools and colleges on the UCAS admissions database. It shows that: ●●

●●

●●

100 élite schools (less than 3 per cent of all schools and colleges offering post-16 qualifications) accounted for a third of admissions to Oxbridge. At the 30 most successful schools, one quarter of university entrants went to Oxbridge. 100 élite schools accounted for over a sixth of admissions to the ‘Sutton 13’ group of leading, research-led universities.

Over 80 per cent of these élite schools are in the independent sector, which accounts for 7 per cent of the school-age population. The analysis reveals that these trends cannot be attributed to A-level results alone: ●●

●●

●●

The proportion of university entrants going to Oxbridge from the top performing 30 independent schools was nearly twice that of the top performing 30 grammar schools – despite having very similar average A-level scores. At the 30 top performing comprehensive schools, only half the expected pupils were admitted to the 13 Sutton Trust universities, given the overall relationship between schools’ average A-level results and university admissions. At the 30 top performing independent schools, however, a third more pupils than expected were admitted to the 13 Sutton Trust universities, given the overall relationship between schools’ average A-level results and university admissions.

Political intentions, then, appear to be compromised by deeper social forces. Nonetheless, even if they were not, there are questions left unanswered about undergraduate courses. The most fundamental is: why do we need 50 per cent of the population to be graduates? There is a range of answers to this question, some somewhat cynical, others more altruistic: 1 In a society of diminishing employment, it keeps young people off the employment statistics for up to five years (usefully, the period between elections!). 2 Everyone ought to have an equal opportunity to excel or to lay the foundation of a higher quality of working life.

4

International Perspectives on Higher Education

3 There is a growing need for qualifications in the work-place, driven by modern problems like climate change and global population increase, and thus the need for new skills.

New Labour’s legacy to higher education These are potential answers; some of them persuasive. New Labour’s answer was slightly different: it depended on a philosophical view of society – that it was moving from an industrial model (where the UK had been historically successful, but where we were losing ground to cheap-labour economies) to a knowledge model (the future was about selling expertise not things). The mantra was: Knowledge is the intangible asset of wealth creation in today’s globalised economy (http://www.signsofthetimes.org.uk/knowledge/html) There was another question that kept raising its head in one form or another: what kinds of courses are likely to satisfy the needs of these new undergraduates and/or of future society? One school of thought believed that only the traditional subjects were valuable. But while it could reasonably be argued that the knowledge society would benefit from an explosion of scientists, mathematicians, students of medicine and of various technologies, it was harder to see what opportunities there might be for increased numbers of historians, classicists or theologians. The other school of thought, largely espoused through the pragmatism of the universities themselves, was built on vocationalism (often some steps removed from the knowledge society philosophy) to invent new disciplines (such as journalism, drama, media studies and subjects aimed at the leisure industry). I have argued elsewhere that many of these disciplines are entirely legitimate (Kerry 2010); but legitimacy may still beg questions of utility at a national level. It remains too easy for the sceptics to poke fun at a BSc in golf course management or a BA in performing arts management. So, at undergraduate level there was a burgeoning problem of rationale. The temptation was to bury heads in sand, especially as – at the beginning – there was money to support students and courses. Then along came the trauma of student loans. Blair’s great idea became Brown’s fiscal nightmare. In hindsight, Brown’s claim, as prime minister, to the Labour Party has a hollow ring:



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

5

we have shown in Britain that we can unleash social mobility when we both believe in and invest in the potential of each and every child. (http://www.labour.org.uk/ gordon-browns-speech-progressive-government-conference) The good times couldn’t last. Even the most elementary view of them must have foreseen that raising HE access nine-fold would have massive cost implications. Then two things happened. The costs hit home in the form of student fees and student loans; and a recession bit, forcing those fees to previously unforeseen heights. Of the former, the BBC News (2011) reported the President of Cambridge University Students’ Union, Rahul Mansigani, as saying: The new fee system shifts the funding burden from the government into vast debts for students, and is a cynical and damaging attack on our university system. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education/12492825) As far as recession was concerned, in the present context its effect on undergraduate and graduates is what matters. Whereas, until recently, a university education was seen as a gateway to a measure of employment security (albeit following a career in a modestly-rewarded public sector job) and even to eventual security at pensionable age, the situation for today’s would-be or in-training graduates consists of several bricks in a not very welcoming wall: 1 The prospect of spending more than two decades paying back student loans. 2 Lower wages than heretofore for equivalent white-collar jobs. 3 Far lower job security. 4 Poorer conditions of service overall. 5 Higher pension contributions when in employment. 6 A longer working life – perhaps eventually to age 70. 7 Lower pension rewards at the end of this extended career. A further irony is, of course, that devolution – that other plank of New Labour policy – means that while the picture painted above may apply to students in England and Wales, Scottish students studying at Scottish universities will continue to be substantially free of these front-loaded burdens. New Labour’s policies for devolution (Reynolds 2008 describes

6

International Perspectives on Higher Education

those for Wales) have dismantled the previously considerable overlaps between systems across the UK and have produced discontinuous and divisive outcomes across the nation: no longer a united kingdom but, educationally, a disunited one. Such a movement comes, again ironically, against a wider backdrop of globalization. Globalization may be seen as the guarantor of consistency or the bogey-man of straight-jacketed conformity. It may imply that on a worldwide (not just on a UK) scale people should be privileged to receive the same experiences in their HE; or it may be seen as a way of imposing faceless unification on systems that previously were valuable for their diversity. The negative view is summed up by an outburst from a fictional anthropologist in a McCall Smith (2006) novel. Domenica says to her young friend: What do you think globalization is all about? Who gains if we’re all reduced to compliant consumers, all with the same tastes, all prepared to accept decisions which are made at a distance, by people whom we can’t censure or control? . . . I . . . refuse to lie down in the face of all that . . . I want to live in a community with an authentic culture . . . that engages with the issues that concern me . . . We thought that we were liberating people from oppressive cultural circumstances . . . we were, in fact, taking something away from them . . . We thought that tradition was bad, that it created hidebound societies, that it held people down. But, in fact, what tradition was doing all along was affirming community and the sense that we are all members one of another. Do we really love and respect one another more in the absence of tradition? ... Or have we merely converted one another into moral strangers? In Europe from 1998, and more widely, that trend in a HE context became formalized into the Bologna Process. Its effect on postgraduate education was described by Karran and Löfgren (2010). At least in some circles it was seen as the result of neo-liberal politics (Nybom 2003) and part of a wider marketization and commodification movement in HE (Lorenz 2006). This is discussed further below. Back in the UK the transformation in HE and its place in the national psyche were being subtly eroded by another change that was politically inspired. Originally the pinnacle of the work of the Department for Education (under its various manifestations and labels), now HE became detached from the rest of the education system: more discontinuity. In 2007 the work of universities was moved to the short-lived Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills under John Denham MP, another favourite of New Labour; and



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

7

in 2009 universities became an anonymous fragment of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills under the control of Lord Mandelson (the Dark Lord of New Labour) who in the internet magazine Personnel Today (http://www.personneltoday.com) flagged up his intention for the new department as: ‘ensuring British business can compete successfully in the future world economy’ – all of which might be construed as a history of HE’s translation into the faceless arm of raw vocationalism. So, there is a genuine case that can be made for the attribution of HE’s current troubles – a case that points back to three figures who might be recognized as the unholy trinity of New Labour: Blair, with his obsession with a form of the knowledge society which has not really happened; Gordon Brown, famous for his flirtations (as Chancellor) with ‘Prudence’, which proved she was more of a whore than an anchoress; and Mandelson, responsible for the quiet assassination of the whole sector from proud, free-standing, world-renowned, education system to an almost invisible training sub-set of business serving only economic needs.

The Coalition’s concerns Given the economic climate inherited by the Coalition government in the UK (2010 onwards), it is not surprising that its main contribution to the saga is about revenue generation, though Prime Minister Cameron did become embroiled in a row about whether Oxford University admitted sufficient working-class and ethnic minority students (Porter et al. 2011), albeit that Oxford hit back at the accusation. Meantime, Porter et al. concluded that: The latest fallout will add to growing controversy that the Coalition is attempting to ‘socially engineer’ university admissions by asking top institutions to set targets for recruiting students from state schools, poor backgrounds and ethnic minorities. Soon after this outburst, the Coalition produced a White Paper (Business, Industry and Skills 2011). The biggest single innovatory thrust of this relates to the privatization of university courses. The tenor and driving force of this White Paper emerges from the Executive Summary. Called Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System, cynics might say the Paper should be re-named Higher Education: Money at the Heart of the System. Thus its main aims are summarized thus:

8

International Perspectives on Higher Education Our reforms tackle three challenges. First, putting HE on a sustainable footing. We inherited the largest budget deficit in post-war history, requiring spending cuts across government. By shifting public spending away from teaching grants and towards repayable tuition loans, we have ensured that higher education receives the funding it needs even as substantial savings are made to public expenditure. Second, institutions must deliver a better student experience; improving teaching, assessment, feedback and preparation for the world of work. Third, they must take more responsibility for increasing social mobility.

Then, it goes on to identify those ‘new providers’, who will meet certain financial criteria: The second element is the creation of a flexible margin of about 20,000 places in 2012/13 to support expansion by providers who combine good quality with value for money and whose average charge (after waivers have been taken into account) is at or below £7,500. Places will be removed from institutions’ core allocation on a pro-rata basis, once AAB places have also been removed. This will create a margin of places, which will then be competed for on the basis of agreed criteria. This will make it easier for further education colleges, new entrants and other non-traditional providers that can attract students, to expand to meet demand. (para 4.20) So, New Labour’s legacy to the university lives on in the poisoned chalice of debt picked up by the HE sector. So far, it has to be admitted, the picture has been depressing. But this is not a depressing book – far from it! This collection of papers presents a landscape that is hopeful and vibrant, a canvas of a sector where there is talent, potential and drive among both staff and students. But virtue is not out of the wood: there are still wolves out there, and their intentions are not honourable. So it is a book which takes a balanced look at both opportunities and threats. That is precisely what the rest of this chapter does, before it goes on to survey the collected papers themselves.

A SWOT analysis of the higher education sector A chapter of this size could not hope to do justice to all the elements that might be built into a SWOT analysis for the sector. Nevertheless, it



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

9

does pick up and dissect some of the major themes that seem to resonate with fellow HE tutors, beginning with that contentious, contextual issue: globalization. Globalization is the backdrop against which national HE systems are developing. In Europe, in particular, this trend is backed by involvement with the Bologna Declaration. It is true that globalization has the potential to reduce everything it touches to the lowest common denominator: to forge compatibility to the point of uniformity. But it is also true that individual students need to be assured that a degree in one location has a similar value to a degree taken in another; that learning requirements and processes of assessment will have similar natures from one location to another. Equivalence does not have to mean shared identity. In employment terms, employers want to know ‘what they are getting’ from a graduate, whether from Lucerne or Liverpool. Yet, the route by which the graduate achieves the standard can be varied and distinctive. This is the same issue that has afflicted the National Curriculum in the schools’ sector. When it was introduced, it was treated not according to its most benign intention (a national minimum guarantee of educational coverage) but as a syllabus, narrowly defining the gobbets of knowledge which were, and which were not, valued and valuable. It failed to deliver in that mode. It was revised and re-defined on several occasions over many years. It still serves as a beacon; but it is now subject to greater degrees of interpretation – and even, in well-reasoned circumstances, abandonment. The same fate is likely to befall the outcomes of globalization. While some aspects of undergraduate studies may well move more closely in line across national boundaries, potential students will still be looking for distinctiveness in areas such as course content, teaching approaches and emphasis. Subtle issues, such as the relative regard in which particular faculties are held, will still determine student choice. Frameworks may merge, but creativity does not have to emigrate. There are threats – real and serious threats – to HE from globalization (just as there are to every other aspect of society), but the movement is capable of interpretation and malleability: where sufficient will exists. It is an area where critical analysis has to develop over simple passivity – and if not in HE, where can that happen? The strong opponents of globalization tend to see it as the root of several evils, each of which has to be confronted: marketism, managerialism, massification, commodification, corporatization, mediatization, privatization and bureaucratization. These are ugly words, and they can have ugly implications.

10

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Marketism Marketism implies that something which might (because of its intrinsic value) have been provided (out of the public purse) now has to move to a situation in which the individual becomes a consumer – the consumer pays the price for the product, probably for some extrinsic value, and in becoming a consumer inherits consumer rights. Intrinsic value has been replaced by market value. Education has been commodified: turned into something to be bought and sold by anyone with the right resources to do so. In the process, ownership shifts further towards the consumer and further from the provider. The provider becomes ‘a business’, to be run on profit and loss lines. The role of education changes to one of ‘servicing the economy to the neglect of its social and developmental responsibilities’ (Lynch 2006: 1). Marketization brings with it a number of implications. There is an increased emphasis on branding and promotion. Even as I write this sentence, an e-mail pops onto my computer screen (this is absolutely true) to say that one university with which I have association has, of today, re-branded itself by changing all its letter-heads from caterpillar green (my words not theirs) to corporate blue. Such a change doubtless has cost implications in a time of financial constraint – yet is still considered a priority. Marketism puts increasing emphasis on student satisfaction surveys and the resultant league tables derived from these and other measures appearing in the national press. Some might argue that these are more about perceived quality than measurable quality, but being headlined as a success or as a ‘climber’ still matters. Molesworth et al. (2010) note that, in a consumer context, ‘students view the opportunity to gain a degree as a right, and a service which they have paid for, demanding a greater choice and a return on their investment’ – they become ‘active’ in the co-creation of value’ (cover blurb). In an earlier work, Molesworth and his collaborators (2009) made a series of salient points which are worth summarizing: 1 The emphasis shifts for students, to the need to ‘have a degree’ rather than ‘be learners’. 2 A ‘market-led’ university responds to consumer calls by focusing on the content students want at a market rate. 3 Previously, under the guidance of an academic, an undergraduate had the potential to be transformed into a scholar, someone who thinks



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

11

critically; in our consumer society such ‘transformation’ is denied and ‘confirmation’ of the student as (a successful) consumer is favoured. Coleman (2009) translates these principles into the Bologna Process in a paragraph that hits several targets of criticism: The vacuous adjective ‘world-class’, now almost compulsory in official university discourse from mission statements to recruitment publicity, reflects the explicit policy of the principal Bologna signatories to establish an internal hierarchy of universities, the top few of which will compete for places in global rankings. Although HE is not a market like any other, it is nonetheless economic competitiveness which stimulates ‘efforts to attract and retain students and academics with the potential for enhancing the human capital of a country’. (Knight 2008: 26) The Bologna Process is henceforth inseparable from this market. Nor is there any reasonable doubt that Bologna does lead to convergence in policy, as Voegtle et al. (2011) demonstrated. But not everything about markets is unmitigated evil. It has to be said that the aspiration to put the student at the heart of the learning process is entirely laudable, and is something that Kerry and Kerry (2010) recently argued for very strongly in a postgraduate context. Anything that furthers that process is desirable. Marketism has forced that particular issue, and even put the outcomes onto a public agenda through the use of league tables. Furthermore, where the student becomes, in a very direct way, the purchaser of the learning experience, it is entirely right that he/she should have an enhanced say in the quality of the experiences offered. Nor is there anything essentially wrong with universities striving for a brand – if, by that, one means a distinctiveness about how they work and what is on offer. The proviso is that they avoid the crassness of the market-place. Annual attendance at various graduation ceremonies, for example, highlights the down-side of branding when entirely unsuitable people (vacuous celebrities and those with no claim to intellectual achievement) are given honorary awards simply in the hope that their name will attract increased applications. There is a further danger brought about by the massification that results both from government policy and from marketing, and this is highlighted by Baty (2009): notably, that the sector cannot maintain quality in its senior (professorial) staff because there simply are not enough people trained to the required level.

12

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Insofar as marketing forces universities to be creative in their course design, careful in their teaching, concerned for the pastoral care of students, keen to offer the best by way of physical facilities, and committed to high-profile excellence in intellectual activity, then it must be seen as a positive bonus. The danger with all marketing is that the package outstrips the product; and that is unacceptable wherever and whenever it occurs. Commodification As implied above, commodification is a sub-set of marketization: its critics argue that it changes the educative process into a ‘package’ that can be ‘sold’; which in turn converts universities into service providers. ESIB – the National Unions of Students in Europe (2005) – for example, decries the many universities which it sees focusing: only on preparation for the labour market and possibilities for maximising personal financial returns upon graduation, which is a negative and one-sided approach. This has also led to a decrease in cooperation and solidarity between individual students and an increase in unhealthy competition for the purpose of the fulfilment of personal aims. The Unions suggest that: open access to all levels of education is the cornerstone of a socially, culturally and democratically inclusive society and a pre-requisite for individual development and well-being. In a broader context than just HE, Ball (2004) made an impassioned plea to the effect that: Without some recognition of and attention within public debate to the insidious work that is being done, in these respects, by privatisation and commodification – we may find ourselves living and working in a world made up entirely of contingencies, within which the possibilities of authenticity and meaning in teaching, learning and research are gradually but inexorably erased. It is time to think differently about education policy before it is too late. We need to move beyond the tyrannies of improvement, efficiency and standards, to recover a language of and for education articulated in terms of ethics, moral obligations and values.



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

13

So, feelings run high on this issue. As with all of these themes, there are counter-arguments. Ball’s rejection of standards and bench-marks in favour of some looser arrangement is itself open to critique. It is entirely reasonable to look for assurances about quality and quality indicators even within a realm such as HE: as a participant, I want to know that the tutors are competent, the institution effective, and my experience will be intellectually rewarding. But, fundamentally, we are back to the debate between vocationalism and intrinsic value: packaging courses – turning them into commodities – looks like an efficient way to train people vocationally. It does not look like a good way to develop them intellectually, to encourage them to think and be creative. So we are forced back – as so often – to considering the fundamental purpose of HE. Managerialism Inevitably, as universities develop themselves as businesses and move towards adopting elements of commercial activity, they need to be organized and managed in ways which accord with that status. Deem (1998) suggested a decade and a half ago that universities had moved away from the notion of management by a collegiate group of scholars to a model which took on the intensely more hierarchical structures already implanted in the polytechnics which converted to universities in and around 1992. Managerialism is driven by specific requirements: short-term goals, inter-institutional competition and an audit culture. These did not exist in the older universities (it is claimed). Deem even suggests that women in the management structures may be compromised by being required to use their (better than male) peopleskills in order to make staff work longer, harder and cheaper. Elton (2010) has provided a detailed critique of managerialism, illustrating it with an assessment of how the nature of senior posts (such as that of Vice Chancellor) have changed in both job role and the nature of the people appointed. Clegg and McAuley (2005) are more optimistic. They see the academic management of universities largely in the hands of middle managers, and they challenge the stance taken by Deem and Elton that collegiality is dead. They conclude: a more creative engagement with a broader range of existing management literature, which we have summarised in this paper, can extend the boundaries of current debates within higher education. The managerialist/collegiality dualism by mis-describing the complexity and range of

14

International Perspectives on Higher Education

possibilities for conceptualising developments in higher education has become part of the problem. It oversimplifies and exaggerates many of the negative consequences of managerialism it seeks to critique. Imagining more productive relationships in higher education, in ways that do not look nostalgically backwards to an older, more elitist system, may be part of the first steps towards realising universities as more humane places in which to practise (2005: 31). Indeed, one has to be deeply suspicious of looking backwards to a golden age of collegiality. It seems altogether more likely that what people are remembering was a system which allowed more grass-roots autonomy (for example, at the level of day-to-day teaching) and personal freedom at the level of the individual (how one’s time was used outside some limited timetabled constraints), while at the same time preserving strategic decision-making for a limited cadre of senior staff who then communicated institution-level outcomes without much in the way of consultation and with very little involvement of staff members. Bureaucratization The inevitable outcome of managerialism is an increase in systems and the people who run them. It is important, though, before embarking on this journey, to make a distinction. It has always been my personal view that one should distinguish, in institutional terms, between administration and bureaucracy. Administration comes with neutral or positive connotations. Administrators, in an academic institution, are there to make academics’ jobs easier. They remove the burden of organizing the car park, running the cleaning services, master-minding the graduation ceremonies, keeping student and financial records, and so on. Administrators are facilitators, oiling the works of academic progress – an invaluable support team doing modest or senior jobs in ways which prevent academia being cluttered by the systems that support it. Bureaucracy is another animal. It reverses the priorities. The systems are the poetry while the academic work of the institution is merely the backdrop against which that poetry is composed. Bureaucrats control the decision-making, and their concerns (usually financial, procedural and market-orientated) determine and control the direction of the intellectual effort.



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

15

That bureaucracy has indeed taken over more than its share of the control of universities is neatly illustrated by a UNESCO paper (Neave 2006). This takes a look at the recent development of the British university from the perspective of mainland Europe. This is how continentals see us in comparison with themselves: Closer public scrutiny, conditional and performance-related funding, concentration of executive power, national assessments of research output and surveillance of costs were all, in different degrees and combinations, visible and at work, and in different combinations in the systems to the east of Harwich and to the south of Dover. (Neave 2006: 24) Corporatization Most of the trends and concepts reviewed in the last few pages come together to produce the concept of the corporatization of the university: an institution run like a business, organized like a business, overtly for profit, with business-like hiring and firing of staff, and open to the vicissitudes of a market which is driven by demand and subject to competition. Technology plays a part in the process not as yet discussed: it provides the management systems that control the internal organization; and it operates the tools that underpin the products (courses) and the university’s ability to sell them in the market to respond to global opportunities. Corporatization changes the nature of the institution away from intellectualism, creativity and the pursuit of knowledge and towards the pursuit of income, efficiency measures and brand loyalty. While there is nothing intrinsically wrong with making a profit, and everything right with good financial management, the question is once again about chickens and eggs, above the driver and the driven. Some of the virtues of corporatization may, like the virtues of good administration, sustain, promote and further good academic practice. The problem comes when one moves from a situation of ‘means to an end’ to one of ‘the end in itself’. Mediatization If the news is good it seems logical to shout about it. HE has traditionally been somewhat shy of the media, but is now caught up in the worlds of media and technology. The descriptors seem, from the literature, to have two main thrusts which do not – on the face of it – sit that happily together.

16

International Perspectives on Higher Education

The first relates to the way in which the media can be utilized as part of the overall business concept: a conscious process of public relations, and institutional advertising and promotion. The second is about the use of new media as ways to assist in the globalization of potentially profit-making courses by using technology as a vehicle for selling and delivering course products – usually overseas. As processes, each has a legitimate role to play. It seems to be in everyone’s interests if the community – local and wider – values what universities do and understands how and why they do it. Mediatization of courses allows them to reach places they would not otherwise go, perhaps meeting needs not met in the host communities. Spreading intellectual activity and learning is, surely, what universities are about? The value of mediatization must be assessed through the lens of motivation. In that, it is not unlike many of the other concepts visited in this Introduction. But, arguably, the most contentious of this parade of education concepts – and currently the hottest potato in the HE debate – has been reserved till last: privatization. Privatization Controversy dogs the latest White Paper (BIS 2011). It is clear that privitization is in the wings waiting to pounce. Ainley and Allen (2011) see it coming from existing educational institutions: Despite their admiration for Blair, today’s Tories regard New Labour as hopeless fudgers. So Willetts will end what he calls ‘the fixed, yet illogical, link between degree-awarding powers and teaching’ and allow competition by new providers, such as FE colleges offering cut-price vocational degrees, as well as opening competition between universities to pack students in and charge them high. But it is not even that simple: huge university fees and massive student debt will (it is hoped) drive down prices precisely through all those forces of marketism which we have reviewed above. Ainley and Allen again: Like Michael Gove – who cut funding for the pseudo-vocational qualifications criticised by Alison Wolf – Willetts proposes diverting all working-class students who he and Gove plainly believe should not be in



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

17

‘real’ HE into ‘apprenticeship degrees’ at 18+, delivered by FE in competition with private providers. This will achieve the two things Willetts needs to dig himself out: reduce HE student numbers and reduce fees. However, the new ‘degrees’ will quickly be revealed as Apprenticeships Without Jobs, replaying the Youth Training Schemes of the 1980s. They might, however, attract applicants from the Million+ former-polytechnics and the 1994 Group of mainly campus universities, perhaps forcing them to reduce their exorbitant fees for the same old academic modules mixed with varieties of business studies. Willetts, it seems, is under the illusion that this move will open up the flood-gates to social mobility. What it will actually do is to distinguish between different types of HE students just as grammars mark out the privileged from the comprehensive pupils in the school sector. Ainley and Allen cannot resist a note of hopeful cynicism in assessing the situation, but it hard to say what effect student opinion will have on the new breed of managerialised Vice Chancellors: That this is fantasy has been grasped by the more radical of the student resistance. They recognise that in a world that is oiling its way to selfdestruction, the old social democratic nostrums – expand GDP and become better educated, trained and qualified – no longer apply. Students have begun to think for themselves about an alternative to the future offered by Willetts and Gove Summary We began this survey with two metaphors: one about turbulence and the other about selling the silver to pay the price for that turbulence. We have ended it with more turbulence as the debate on the White Paper is due to unfold; and more proposals from a government proposing to sell off what is left of the silver to pay off the creditors. In between, we have discovered things of genuine value in our HE system. The questions remain: will HE be wrested away from us by the bailiffs or lost in the turmoil of redefining its future?

The response of this book I really warm to books of papers. I warm to their variety: the ways in which one author will present a careful and reasoned case based on meticulous

18

International Perspectives on Higher Education

evidence, another will present an emotional journey. I like traversing these differences, picking among them what most catches the eye and heart. I hope the reader will, too; because this is not a book designed by numbers and fitted tight in straight-jacketed prose. While it is clear that the future for HE is not without a degree of controversy, this book offers an optimistic view of a sector facing its challenges. Nor should it be assumed that the writers of the ten papers that make up the book come out of carefully hand-picked, similar philosophical traditions. They do not. They were selected as experts in their respective fields; and in accord with the spirit of HE, they were left free to make their own cases around their fields of expertise. The group of authors does, though, cover educational experience across much of the globe: Sweden, Canada, China, Norway, Cameroon, the USA and Australia, as well as the UK; most also work internationally. One of the joys of collections of academic papers resides in the differences rather than their similarities: differences in style, approach and opinion. No attempt has been made to reconcile these – that is for the reader. This book offers differences; and thus, opportunity for discussion and debate. A reader should be able to dip in and out of the papers; to enage with the ideas in whatever order seems appropriate. The papers are, however, themed. The book is in three parts. Part 1 examines issues that accrue around ideas of ethical behaviour in HE, academic freedom and spirituality. The section begins in Chapter 1 by asking searching questions about ethical behaviour and standards in HE. Kerry points out that, in the transition to managerialism which most universities have embraced, at least in part, it becomes even more urgent to discover what defines ethical behaviour by institutions, staff and students. He suggests that university managers should be taking a lead in setting the ethical tone of institutions; and he highlights some cases where there have been notable derelictions of duty in this regard. In Chapter 2 Carolle Kerry and Trevor Kerry combine to challenge traditional notions of academic freedom. They suggest that the more extreme formulations of this concept play little part in a modern university; and they contend that the concept has been outmoded for decades. The view will doubtless prove unpopular in some circles, but – they argue – idealism has to be tempered with realism. Moving on to Chapter 3, Tom Sherwood re-examines the place of campus spirituality; and looks at the changing role of the university chaplain. In times which have seen traumatic events across the world, students – under pressure also from constraints of time, economics and academic work – need an anchorage; and many find that they can and do develop their spiritual nature alongside their intellectual and personal lives.



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

19

Part 2 tackles in more detail some of the leadership and management themes spotlighted briefly in this Introduction. Robinson, in Chapter 4, offers a frank and revealing analysis of management change in a university college. She examines the problems besetting the institution using Watson’s (2000) taxonomy of wicked issues; and offers – in the spirit of this volume – questions rather than conclusions. Globalization and internationalism are tackled head on by Ngwana and Liu in Chapter 5. Löfgren, in Chapter 6, brings his Scandinavian experience to bear on implementing some of the Bologna requirements. Chapter 7 reports on a practical experiment in international education through the work of Kingsley in the USA and the UK. Finally, Part 3 discusses the core activities of learning and teaching. Early in the Introduction there was a discussion of the knowledge society. In Chapter 8 Hughes and Tight re-visit the idea of the ‘learning society’, and of the knowledge economy as a policy focus. Bacsich leads us, in Chapter 9, through some issues related to learning and technology and students’ reactions to, and use of, it. To close, Le Cornu takes us back to the heart of the matter by describing an experiment in experiential learning in teacher education. These are vibrant papers. They are a long way from capitulating to the more negative trends in HE described above. But they are also realistic, accepting that change happens and that, like all nature, we either adapt to it or die. None of the authors is giving up the ghost: this is a story with a future as well as a past.

References Ainley, P. and Allen, M. (2011) ‘Is full-blown privatization of higher education a progressive policy?’ Guardian 29 June 2011. Available on http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/mortarboard/2011/jun/29/ david-willetts-higher-education-white-paper Ball, S. J. (2004) ‘Education for Sale! The Commodification of Everything?’ King’s Annual Education Lecture, King’s College, London,17 June 2004 Baty, P. (2009) ‘“Massification” takes its toll on professorial standards’ Times Higher Educational Supplement 10 July 2009. Available on http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=407334 BBC News (2005) ‘Grammars head students’ success’ BBC News 28 January 2005. Available on http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4217117.stm, accessed 1 August 2011 —(2011) ‘NUS criticized over tuition fees memo’ BBC News 17 February 2011. Available on http://www.bbc.co.uk/education/12492825, accessed 2 August 2011

20

International Perspectives on Higher Education

BIS (Business, Industry and Skills) (2011) Higher Education: Students at the Heart of the System London: Department of Business Industry and Skills Cm 8122, June 2011 Clegg, S. and McAuley, J. (2005) ‘Conceptualising middle management in higher education: a multi-faceted discourse’ Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 27 (1) 19–34 Coleman, J. (2009) ‘Bologna, mobility and the marketisation of higher education’. Paper given to UCML workshop The Bologna Process and its implications for Languages Schools/Departments in UK HEIs, Kings College London, 3 July 2009 Deem, R. (1998) ‘“New Managerialisim” and higher education: the management of performances and culture in universities in the UK’ International Studies in Sociology of Education 8 (1) 47–70 DfES (Department for Education and Skills) (2004) ‘Participation rates in higher education for the academic years 1999/2000–2002/2003’. Press Release 14 April 2004 Elton, L. (2010) ‘Humboldt’s relevance today’ in Kerry, T. ed. Meeting the Challenges of Change in Postgraduate Education London: Continuum pp. 73–88 Galindo-Ruada, F., Marcenaro-Gutierrez, O. and Vignoes, A. (2004) The Widening Socio-Economic Gap in UK Higher Education London: Centre for Economics Education, June 2004 Karran, T. and Löfgren, K. (2010) ‘Postgraduate studies in Europe: looking beyond Bologna’ in Kerry, T. (ed.) (2010) Meeting the Challenges of Change in Postgraduate Education London: Continuum pp. 89–104 Kerry, C. and Kerry, T. (2010) ‘Small-scale indicative research’ in Kerry, T. (ed.) Meeting the Challenges of Change in Postgraduate Education London: Continuum pp. 29–46 —ed. (2010) Meeting the Challenges of Change in Postgraduate Education London: Continuum Knight, J. (2008) Higher Education in Turmoil. The Changing World of Internationalization. Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers Lorenz, C. (2006) ‘Will the universities survive European integration? Higher education policies in the EU and in the Netherlands before and after the Bologna Declaration’ Sociologica Internationalis 44 (1) 123–51 Lynch, K. (2006) ‘Neo-liberalism and marketisation: the implications for higher education’ European Educational Research Journal 5(1) 1–17, accessed 5 August 2011 on http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2006.5.1.1 McCall Smith, A. (2006) Espresso Tales London: Abacus Molesworth, M., Nixon, E. and Scullion, R. (2009) ‘Having, being and higher education: the marketisation of the university and the transformation of the student into a consumer’ Teaching in Higher Education 14 (3) 277–87 Molesworth, M, Scullion, R. and Nixon, E. (2010) The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer London: Routledge National Unions of Students in Europe (2005) ‘Commodification of Education’, A Policy Paper posted on 8 November 2005. Available on http://www.esib.org/ index.php/documents/policy-papers/298-pp-comm.html, accessed 6 August 2011 Neave, G. (2006) ‘The Bologna Process and the evaluative state: a viticultural



The Changing Face of Higher Education: Challenge and Opportunity

21

parable’ in UNESCO Forum Occasional Papers No. 7 Managerialism and Evaluation in Higher Education Paris: UNESCO pp. 11–34 Nybom, T. (2003) ‘The Humboldt legacy: reflections on the past, present and future of the European university’ Higher Education Policy 16 (2) 141–59 Porter, A., Paton, G. and Kirkup, J. (2011) ‘David Cameron brands “all white” Oxford a disgrace’ Daily Telegraph 11 April 2011 Reynolds, D. (2008) ‘New Labour, education and Wales: the devolution decade’ Oxford Review of Education 34 (6) 753–65 Sutton Trust (2008) ‘Élite schools dominate admission to top universities’. Available on http://suttontrust.com/news/news/elite-schools-dominate-admissions-totop-universities posted 1 February 2008, accessed 2 August 2011 Voegtle, E. M., Knill, C. and Dobbins, M. (2011) ‘To what extent does transnational communication drive cross-national policy convergence? The impact of the Bologna process on domestic higher education policies’ Higher Education 61 (1) 77–94 Watson, D. (2000a) ‘Managing in higher education: the ‘wicked issues’ in Higher Education Quarterly 54(1) 5–21 Wells, H. G. ‘A story of the days to come’ in Hammond, J. (1998) The Complete Short Stories of H. G. Wells London: Phoenix

Internet sources http://www.labour.org.uk/gordon-browns-speech-progressive-governmentconference http://www.personneltoday.com http://www.signsofthetimes.org.uk/knowledge.htm/

Part 1

Ethics, Freedom and Spirituality

Chapter 1

The Ethics of Higher Education: Maintaining Ethical Standards in the Twenty-first Century University Trevor Kerry

Introduction While most universities produce codes that govern the practices adopted by research students, few seem to have given the same amount of consideration to ethical behaviour of the institutions themselves and their employees. A number of pressures operate on universities to alter the way in which they conduct their business, including managerialism, marketism, massification, accountability and commodification. In these circumstances, it is suggested that universities need to re-evaluate the ethical principles on which they operate, to identify how those principles relate to the pressures of modern university life, and to begin to develop ethical codes and procedures that govern their own operation. This paper begins by reviewing the nature of the university and some of the ethical principles that might be called into service to guide its activities. Five key areas of university life are examined from an ethical perspective: teaching, management, research, administration and sustaining quality. The place of political correctness, and of faith, in the formation of ethical procedures for universities is discussed briefly. It is suggested that it is the role of senior university management to take the lead in creating the university as an ethical institution.

Background Crisp (1998) defines ethics as ‘the systems of value and custom instantiated in the lives of particular groups of human beings’. He notes that the term may refer to ‘one in particular of these systems’ i.e. morality with its notions of rightness, wrongness, guilt, shame and so on. From here it may be applied to mean actual moral principles: ‘Why did you return the book?’ ‘It was the only ethical thing to do in the circumstances.’ He notes that

26

International Perspectives on Higher Education

‘philosophers have been concerned to establish links between the ethical sphere of life itself and other spheres’ such as art; we might add business, education and research. Finally, one might debate what constitutes the moral view on a topic as opposed to other views; this he calls ‘meta-ethics’. With this overview of what constitutes ethics, the question is then raised: Why is it important that universities aspire to be ethical institutions? The answer lies, at least in part, in the rapidly changing nature of universities. In the UK these once esoteric organizations for 5 per cent of the population now absorb almost 50 per cent, with a wider social mix that imports a broader spectrum of personal values. They exist in a society which has become both increasingly multi-ethnic and multi-cultural, and yet that has loosened its ties to the traditional ethical systems that came through religious faith. As instruments of society, universities are in a position of ‘representing’ society to their clients and at the same time being the clients themselves of that society – with clear ethical implications for behaviour in each direction. Universities are increasingly managerialist, run as businesses with all the ethical tensions that the ‘profit motive’ and the ‘market-place’ imply. They are organizations based on the intellect: by definition, therefore, the place where debate (political, social, philosophical, ethical) has its highest expression. They are peopled by individuals (tutors, students – but also administrators, cleaners) who interact with others and thus need informed principles by which to regulate their relationships. They carry out, and train students to carry out activities, such as research or consultancy, which impinge on the lives of others so that these transactions bear an obligation for ethical scrutiny. Technology has opened the floodgates to the potential for shared knowledge to become plagiarized knowledge and for other forms of web-based activity; these need to be evaluated against ethical criteria. Educational institutions might be said to be characterized, therefore, by ‘ethical complexity’ (Campbell 2003: 17), or even by ‘a conspiracy of silence’ about ethics (Scott 2004: 439). On the one hand one can build (with Starrat 1994) lists of core ethical principles: respect, care, fair dealing, honesty, loyalty, compassion. On the other hand one might opt for Somerville’s (2000) more pathological view of eliminating what is deemed to be wrong: things that cheat, harm, deceive, deprive, neglect or intimidate. But lists, whether positive or negative, do not rule out interpretation, disagreement or uncertainty within specific circumstances. So the debate about ethics and ethical procedures should be subject, in universities and elsewhere, to continuous and constantly monitored pursuit. Thus it is that this paper attempts to look at some dimensions of university



The Ethics of Higher Education

27

life and activity, and to begin to draw out the dimensions around which such debate should be pursued. There may be others, but the dimensions around which the paper concentrates its attention are these: 1 The university in society. 2 Teaching. 3 Management. 4 Research. 5 Administration. 6 Quality matters.

The university in society What is the purpose of a university education? This is a question that lends itself to answers on a variety of levels. Current government-led philosophy is based in the twin portals of vocational preparation on the one hand, and economic advantage to society on the other. But there are other approaches. In the broad area of the Arts, Waugh (www.ugs.usf.edu/gened/university20%education20%final.pdf) has provided some clues about the answer. She suggests five purposes that stem from a philosophy that uses key words such as curiosity and understanding, and from conceptual processes that are critical and analytical. First, the university graduate must understand and appreciate symbols – linguistic, artistic, mathematical and so on. Second, the graduate operates on a level of understanding that tries to make sense of the ‘worlds’ within which he/she functions: the natural, the social and the human. In the third place, a graduate or an educated person understands how to produce knowledge and access theories – intellectual processes that help to explain ourselves and our world. Fourth, graduates have the keys to unlock an understanding and interpretation of themselves, and for examining human nature, cultural diversity and social difference. Finally, the educated person has the tools to find and make a meaningful life, to exercise choice and judgement: ‘a university education begins the lifelong project of fashioning a way of being in the world that is one’s own’. This assertion comes close to Franz’s (2007: 5) championing of critical reflection theory as a means to understanding the process of adult education. In the lifetime of older university teachers there has been a move from a university system that valued knowledge for its own sake (albeit with some

28

International Perspectives on Higher Education

vocational undertones) and was free at the point of delivery, to a fee-paying scenario that assumes (perhaps erroneously) that graduates (across the board) are going to become high earners and thus able to provide fiscal recompense and support to society for its investment. Nor is it only undergraduate courses that are affected by these issues. These views resonate with, though they are not identical to Maxwell’s (2003) insights into the tensions that have built around research higher degrees (www.aare. edu.au/conf03nc/03025z.pdf). Commodification of degrees has predominated, she argues, over student need. This paradigm shift in the nature of knowledge (and implicitly in its ownership) provides a raft of ethical questions and dilemmas. The implication of this shift in the higher education paradigm, for example, is towards increased governmental control. There is increased external monitoring of quality standards through, for example, the work of the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA). There is a demand for accountability on matters such as retention and completion rates. Various more or less overt methods are used to target funding to control which courses operate and which do not. Control of research funds delineates the relative viability, and thus the success, of institutions. Departments such as the Teacher Development Agency have growing levels of curriculum influence as against the judgements of professional educators. It could be argued that the format of pronouncements from government departments such as the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills/Business, Innovation and Skills is often more propagandist than evidence-based. All of these attempts to align higher education more closely as a tool of government have ethical implications for our epistemology: Whose knowledge is it? Who controls it? What is its fundamental purpose? How can that purpose best be served for the good of all? In pursuing the ethical dimensions of higher education it is imperative to examine the nature of these dilemmas and come to a view of what constitutes ethical higher education for society as a whole, for the institutions that deliver it, for the students who experience it, and for the clients who hope to benefit from the products of it. This accepts, but goes beyond, the truism that knowledge is power (Paechter et al. 2001) and asks how the guardians of knowledge should exercise their power and according to what over-arching principles. To try to explore some elements in this overall theme a number of questions have been formulated. Space precludes all but the briefest examination of each, but it is hoped the reader will quickly appreciate the complexity of moving towards an answer to each question.



The Ethics of Higher Education

29

What are the ethical implications of government control of education? This debate goes to the heart of issues of democracy. That it is a concern around the world is evidenced in the UK from Surrey University’s public reservations about being in thrall to government money (Davis 2003) and as far afield as Egypt where Khaled (2009) reports fears of a government take-over of university provision. The underlying disquiet is always similar: that resources will be used to impose top-down and inappropriate ‘measures’ of efficiency which fail to resonate with the freedoms implicit in university knowledge and thought. In the USA, where private universities are widespread, the same fear haunts the corridors, according to McCluskey and Edwards (2009): Federal aid . . . drives up tuition costs, encourages bloat and inefficiency, and is an unfair burden on taxpayers. It also poses a threat to the core strengths of American higher education, including institutional autonomy, competition, and innovation. All efforts to impose top-down federal regulations on colleges and universities should be rejected. While citizens in democratic countries may fail to find the issue that moves them, Elton (2010) is wise to remind us that ‘Hitler’s gift’ was to poison the universities in Germany with Nazism. Ethically, what kinds and levels of control can a government exercise over its universities? Albeit in an industrial context, Novotny and Carlin (2005) apply four ethical principles to government control: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. Individuals and organizations can, and should, have control of their own actions by virtue of their being moral entities. Justice demands that citizens benefit from social goods, of which education is one. But government has the duty to promote well-being and make provision to those ends for its citizens, and conversely to shield citizens from harmful outcomes. If applied to higher education, these four ethical principles would suggest that governments can and should provide educational opportunity; that provision should be as widely and fairly available as possible, and the citizens should be exposed to the social goods that emanate from education – whether they be improved employment opportunities or the satisfaction of what is often termed ‘education for its own sake’.

30

International Perspectives on Higher Education

On the other hand, the reality has to be faced that such provision is constrained in the everyday world by resources; and the lack of resources to be all things to all people forces on government the necessity of making choices and melding those choices into policy. Thus, it is the choices and the processes by which they are formulated and decided upon that throw ethical considerations into the melting pot. By definition, there is a real danger here that the decision-making processes will be conditioned less by rational argument or public good, and more by (party) political dogma. What ethical dangers are inherent in control mechanisms such as targetsetting, quality assurance, differential funding? The current increase in applying targets and proliferating so-called quality control mechanisms is, one might argue, precisely an example of political dogma controlling the nature of higher education. What the New Labour government of Tony Blair began throughout the education system was a process that has become labelled as ‘commodification’ (Noble 2002). It rests on a specific dogma: that the value of education lies ‘less for its intrinsic value and more as an instrument for shaping the economy’ (Docking 2000: 3). More worryingly, perhaps, that dogma is itself dependent on Callaghan’s view in the now famous Ruskin College speech, which came close to promulgating education as a means for fitting children for their (pre-ordained) places in society (Riley 1998): citizens reduced to instruments of the State. Most of the targets and performance indicators established for higher education by the government constrain the institutions to perform according to these, arguably, ethically flawed, principles. What are the ethical dangers imposed by the vocational view of knowledge/education? As we have seen, recent government thinking has promoted the vocational in higher education over the intellectual, even though universities have followed this stricture to varying degrees. Austin and Gamson (1983) argue that universities have an essentially normative culture and that reward systems are based primarily on the belief that what universities do is good and valuable. Such a system, they say, attracts individuals with high intellectual curiosity who are willing to give up greater financial rewards to enjoy academic freedom. Yet the move to vocational provision is a move away from that position: work is tailored more narrowly to skills;



The Ethics of Higher Education

31

skills serve the politically-perceived needs of society; only what is practical and economically viable is favoured; and the speculative, innovative and more adventurous thinking for which universities have been traditionally famous is undervalued or un-valued. There is no reason why these two approaches to learning should be seen as mutually exclusive, and they may be mutually beneficial; but the imposed advent of vocationalism over intellectual exploration may raise ethical concerns about the control of knowledge. When learning moves away from ‘learning for its own sake’ what ethical caveats need to be put into operation to guard against the manipulation of the learners by vested interests? Wilcox and Ebbs (1992) maintain that: Colleges and universities are custodians of knowledge. Because the possession of knowledge is the source of power, understood here as the ability to influence decisions in contemporary society, these institutions are also the gateway to power, significantly affecting the quality of economic and social life throughout the world. Thus, insofar as colleges and universities create and disseminate knowledge within a particular society, they are institutions with moral responsibilities to maintain the well-being of that society. This view assumes a degree of detachment on the part of universities to promote freedom to study and for students freely to study those areas of knowledge that they choose. Any attempt to limit and control those areas has to be tested ethically, because what is at stake is not merely the role of the university but the way in which the whole of society is given freedom of thought, is exposed to knowledge outcomes from academics, and is free to respond to the values which such outcomes imply in social behaviour and in the conduct of society and political life. This point goes deeper than the mere control of content in courses that prevents the individual from exploring his/her curiosity. It means that the State takes to itself the right to control, or at least manipulate the availability of, information and to decide upon access to it. Of course, such control may not be control by the State; the State may delegate this power – and it is this point that is dealt with under the heading that follows.

32

International Perspectives on Higher Education

What ethical pitfalls are there in the control of curriculum by each of the stakeholders in learning? We have noted that the State may assume an illegitimate control of knowledge; but the State may also put in place systems of delegation. One example of this might be appropriate from the schools’ sector. The system of school financing known as Academy schools has had some spectacular successes (and some failures); but the outcomes are not the issue here. The system allows a stakeholder (a religious faith, a private individual) to buy a huge stake in a school and for such schools to be freed (should they so wish – though most do not) from the constraints of the National Curriculum. This delegation by the State opens the gate for pressure groups: there have been controversies around so-called Vardy schools (Tayler 2006) where Creationism is alleged to be promoted at the expense of accepted Darwinian theory. While it is unlikely in the UK that any one stakeholder is able to take over, and thus influence in a single direction, the work of a whole university, the fact remains that – within universities – elements such as departments and faculties are not free from such influence. Hence, it is opportune to identify the stakeholder groups who are able to influence the curriculum of university provision. These would certainly include: students, academics, private benefactors and private/public funding agencies. The principle here is that undue or excessive influence of any single stakeholder group may call into question the ethical status of learning. Some examples of each stakeholder’s potential power over the institution will suffice to make the point. Students: in studying for professions most students do, or should, study what is ethical within their discipline areas. These will be different across discipline areas but all will depend on the same broad ethical principles discussed earlier. In addition, students will pursue ethical behaviour within the campus, for example, in relation to treatment of fellow students on matters such as gender, race and religion. Through organizations such as the Students’ Union, students will exercise some influence over how the university is run and organized, about how learning is presented and how teachers teach. They may become involved in concerns such as how the university is managed, for example, when a student-valued member of staff is retired or dismissed, or through consultative groups they may be able to reflect student views on curriculum content or course structures. All these seem to be legitimate activities. The twin dangers are that they become institutionalized (making them toothless tigers), or that they flare



The Ethics of Higher Education

33

into campus disputes (which may have negative effects on morale and learning). Academics: Gibbins (2006) would like to sub-divide the stakeholders further, separating out academics to include categories such as managers, unit managers, staff members, researchers, and research managers. (He also adds categories of administrative staff but these are dealt with later in this paper.) As a group, however, it can hardly be doubted that this is the real locus of curriculum power in most institutions. The ethical issue is about how that power is wielded. To take an example, in a department where academics skew courses solely in order to be able to pursue their personal research interests, there would be ethical questions about how the academy treats its clients, the students, and even, perhaps, about the staff commitment to the broader discipline or to the needs of society in that discipline. One notice seen recently announced a course called Women in Research and was delivered by women and was apparently aimed at attracting an audience of women. While it is tempting to blink at this on the grounds of positive discrimination, the fact remains that a course called Men in Research, delivered by men and aimed mainly at males would cause huge antagonism. The ethics of such campus behaviour has to be seriously questioned. Benefactors & Funding Agencies: ethically, the issues for both of these stakeholders come down to the same set of dilemmas, surrounding what can be termed ‘undue influence’. The danger lies in the motives of the people who provide resources. This is an issue considered below in more detail in the discussion of ownership of research. How are ethical principles embedded into the procedures of quality assurance and other agencies charged with overseeing higher education? One method for ensuring that ethical principles are embedded into universities is through a process of awareness raising leading to audit and training. Thus Gibbins (2006) describes the process of Ethical and Values Audit or EVA (http://www.ethics.org/resources/article_detail.cfm?ID=19). Institutions may work collaboratively by sharing policies, mission statements, charters and codes. Visiting Panels may then review these and gather data as evidence of compliance. Areas of good or questionable performance are noted and these set the agenda for the panels to agree changes with the host body. A panel may make field visits using a variety of methods to gather data: collating policy documents, surveys, gap analysis,

34

International Perspectives on Higher Education

interviews, focus group discussions and observations. But this is essentially a self-help process within institutions. What is harder to control are the ethical principles on which government-appointed agencies work – e.g. the QAA – since these bodies operate within frameworks dictated by the State. There seems to be a hiatus here in ensuring that ethical considerations are taken into account at the very heart of the processes of government – in departments and ministries. Recent experiences with politicians’ expenses have demonstrated just how difficult a task that is. What is the relationship between ethical procedure and academic freedom? The website of the Woodbury University, USA, succinctly identifies the key issues (http://www.woodbury.edu/s/131/index.aspx?sid=131&gid=1& pgid=1868). Staff, it suggests: have the right to express their understanding of the facts relating to the subject matter in a manner which the instructor deems educationally effective and professionally appropriate. Instructors are encouraged to keep abreast of developments in the field and to share this knowledge and understanding with their students. It is expected that controversial matter will be treated with fairness and good taste. The instructors should bear in mind that theirs may be the only viewpoint on a particular subject to which the students are exposed, and they should avoid bias, aiming at presentations which are factually sound and subject to documentation. Faculty have the opportunity to offer students a model of clear thinking and fair evaluation, and should bear in mind the responsibilities placed upon them by the fact that their approach may become the student’s approach to value judgments. The fields of science and medicine are, perhaps, more prone than others to dangers arising from distortion of facts. Thus the University of Oxford’s Practical Ethics News (2009) draws attention to the dangers posed by authors who are disingenuous in the way in which they present their work and that of others: However, science also requires an open discourse where ideas are proposed, tested and analysed. It thrives on competing opinions, since they spur investigation. And famously, occasionally truly outrageous



The Ethics of Higher Education

35

ideas turn out to be right despite fierce resistance. It would be a failure of public trust to form orthodoxies unwilling to consider certain possibilities. This is a very real problem, since science is done by humans – there are cognitive biases, cliques, funding issues, economic and political games, fashions and paradigms that make certain positions less easy to propose and maintain independent of their correctness. (http://www. practicalethicsnews.com/practicalethics/2009/09/academic-freedomisnt-free.html) Ethics exists on the premise that freedom is not licence, and the sustenance of ethical behaviour can only be on the back of individual moral responsibility (this theme is pursued in more detail in the next chapter). How and to what extent can ethics sit at the heart of policy formation? Policy may be made by government or by the individual university, but policy is not value-free. An African source, The Global Civil Society CCLP Worldwide, has drafted and presented the Code of Ethics in Higher Education for Government (2009). It notes: The transformation of national higher education systems is on the political agenda in every country in the world. The higher education (HE) sector is being urged to ‘modernise’, ‘adapt’, ‘diversify’, ‘marketise’, and is expected to become ‘entrepreneurial’, ‘competitive’, more ‘efficient’ and more ‘effective’, more ‘service oriented’, and more ‘societally relevant’. It also has to improve the ‘quality of its processes and products’, its ‘relationship with the labour-market’, and the ‘governance and management’ of its institutions, the universities and colleges. It is generally acknowledged that this transformation can only be successful if the traditional steering relationship between state authorities and higher education institutions is changed dramatically. The problem is self-evident: concepts like entrepreneurialism, competition and marketization may contain elements of self-interest that benefit the organization (the university) materially, but at the expense of a third party (society, students, staff). The State may impose these concepts onto the university as part of its measures of productivity or performance. but they may not resonate with other concepts such as need, service, quality or intellectual truth.

36

International Perspectives on Higher Education

The Ethics and Policy Integration Centre (2009) identifies factors which may help keep policy formation ethical, which include: ●●

●●

●●

●●

●●

Ethical and Legal Context, i.e. the extent to which its activity is characterized by government laws and regulations, whether its employee base is compliance- or values-oriented, the national cultures influencing its operations. Organizational Culture (executive and supervisory leadership, fair treatment of employees, ethics in discussion and dialogue, ethical conduct rewarded, organizational focus). Programme Orientation (whether the approach taken is compliancebased, values-based or designed to satisfy external stakeholders or protect management). Formal Programme Characteristics (e.g. whether there exist: an ethics/ compliance/responsibility officer, a code of conduct, a telephone hotline, and performance appraisal). Programme Follow-through (i.e. a system to detect violators, follow-up on reports, and take consistent policy/action). (http://www.responsible-business.com/design.html)

The same organization also includes on this site an expanded procedure to guide the process. In looking at the detail there, what becomes obvious is that these principles are far more extensive and demanding than would be the norm in the relations between government and universities in implementing national policy generated by politicians. But then, judging by the recent shenanigans over UK politicians’ expenses (Orr 2009) perhaps politicians are not well placed to act as ethical mentors. Summary So far, the intention has been to survey the broad picture of how ethics work in guiding the actions of universities, and in the interplay of the organization with its stakeholders and the relations of stakeholders one to the other. In what follows the perspective moves to examine how ethics affect five key activities that characterize the day-to-day operation of universities. In doing this efforts are made to highlight not just the theory but the practical application of ethics to behaviour, both corporate and individual.



The Ethics of Higher Education

37

Teaching Teachers exist as professionals and as such inhabit a world which is replete with moral undertones. These relate to the nature of the process of teaching, the relations teachers have with students, and the obligations teachers have to convey ethical behaviour through word and example (Richardson and Fallona 2001). Hamilton (2002) notes that even doctoral programmes often neglect to educate students about academic (as opposed to research) ethics. De Russy and Langbert (2005) catalogue a multiplicity of cases where staff have failed ethically – by plagiarism of students’ work and ideas, by insisting (without just cause) on citation as authors in their students’ work and so on. They conclude: like elementary schools, universities have an obligation to ethically nurture undergraduate and graduate students. Although the earliest years of life are most important for the formation of ethical habits, universities can influence ethics as well. Like the Greek polis, universities become ethical when they become communities of virtue that foster and demonstrate ethical excellence. Lack of commitment to teaching, lack of concern for student outcomes, false advertising about job opportunities open to graduates, and diploma-mill teaching practices are examples of institutional practices that corrode rather than nourish ethics on campuses. Teachers can fail in other ways, too. They may bring undue pressure to bear on students. Former Chief Inspector of Schools, Chris Woodhead, was embroiled in accusations regarding an alleged affair with a former pupil (Hugill 1999) prompting his wife to record that she decided to speak out [about the issue] after her ex-husband told students in January that relationships between teachers and their pupils could be ‘educative’. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/291890.stm) Though at the age of consent, university students are still impressionable and it is reasonable for parents and society to have ethical expectations of university staff in dealing with them. Wilcox and Ebbs (1992) observe: Students are vulnerable before and unequal to the scholar; trust must characterize faculty–student relationships.

38

International Perspectives on Higher Education

In the compilation of curriculum, in presenting ideas honestly, in turning up to deliver lectures and preparing presentations effectively, in personal standards of integrity, in dealings with individuals and agencies, in carrying out their prescribed duties effectively, in marking impartially and without favour or influence, academics signal an ethical approach to their professionalism (Campbell 2000). Teachers also need to act ethically in relation to one another. In cases brought to our attention, one ploy used by new managers to establish their own credibilities was to denigrate the work either of their predecessors or of current faculty members (for example, by ensuring their new colleagues’ doctoral students failed, or by suggesting that these colleagues’ publications were targeted only at inferior journals). Teaching staff have a duty to behave ethically one to another. When they fail ethically they fail as professionals and they fail society at every level.

Management Universities are now frequently run as businesses but, Cave (1995) warns: ‘That goodness secures good business profits is a crude thesis requiring dressing.’ The need to recruit may tip some institutions over ethical boundaries. This is a subtle process – about how information is handled and disseminated, for example. Take these individual scenarios. First, universities depend on good reports about themselves by students in surveys, which then become reported publicly, in the press as league tables. But how do they secure those reports? There are two problems: do enough students respond and are their views sufficiently positive? So it is tempting for universities to offer incentives, e.g. every student who fills in a survey form is entered into a prize draw for an item of value. But the act of offering the chance to win may well condition the student’s responses (whether correctly or not), since he/she may believe that only positive answers will in reality find their way into the draw. The process can become, then, ethically contaminated – but the stakes are high. A second, common example is this. Control of information within the institution – through in-house or on-line newsletters, for example – is important in securing commitment and morale by staff and students. Information is the means by which we orientate ourselves, by which we relate to our job, our colleagues, even our selves. But frequently this kind of information is ‘filtered’: good news is heightened, bad news is played



The Ethics of Higher Education

39

down, even suppressed. We all remember the advice that 9/11 would be a good day to bury the bad news about councillors’ expenses (Sparrow 2001). Universities are subject to their own political machinations. Staffing matters are dealt with in more detail below, but here it is worth remarking that one management ploy has been notable as a response to the pressures imposed on universities by the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE, now REF). Since this demands that academics publish nationally and internationally, and enjoy key characteristics such as ‘esteem’, there has been an unseemly trend to recruit (even poach) retirees and part-time individuals whose profiles will enhance the RAE/ REF submission. These staff may or may not play any significant part in the departments to which they are recruited, but investment in their (often marginal) employment may well condition future levels of funding for their employers. In ethical terms, practices such as this are questionable at a variety of levels. Where improper management takes place in universities, the means to deal with this need to be in place. But attention has been drawn (personal communication 2009) to situations in which, for example, university chaplains have tried to draw the attention of management to poor practice and been rebuffed (see also Chapter 3). Stringer (2004) notes similar issues: A traditional model of Chaplaincy offers a service viewed as peripheral to the primary objectives of the Institution. The attitude seems to be: it is fine for the chaplaincy to represent ethical behaviour to students, but in the real world of cut-and-thrust academic politics one has to mature away from such scruples. Occasionally, such situations result in ‘whistle-blowing’. McGill University (2007) has identified a policy to protect individuals in such circumstances: In all its activities McGill seeks to promote a culture based on honest, transparent and accountable behaviour. It is the expectation that all members of the University community will comply with all applicable regulatory frameworks. In the event that situations arise where the expected standards are not met, the University recognizes that the good faith reporting of improper activities (‘whistle blowing’) is a necessary and valuable service to all its stakeholders, is consistent with members’ duty of loyalty to the institution, and must not be cause for reprisals. This Policy provides for an impartial channel for the making of such

40

International Perspectives on Higher Education

good-faith reports, protection of those who make such reports from reprisals, and for the investigation and disposition of reports using, where possible, existing mechanisms. (http://www.practicalethicsnews. com/practicalethics/2009/09/academic-freedom-isnt-free.html) Another scenario that has proved to be a stumbling block for ethical university management resides in the issue of gifts from benefactors. A recent high profile case concerned the son of Colonel Gaddafi of Libya. Whatever the truth or otherwise of the accusations, the story illustrates the ethical dilemmas such incidents afford. Colonel Gaddafi’s son, Saif al-Islam, produced a PhD thesis for the London School of Economics, but according to the Independent newspaper (Owen 2011): Amid claims that his LSE thesis may have been ghost-written, the LSE is investigating allegations of plagiarism and in a statement yesterday, confirmed a degree can be ‘revoked if there are substantiated concerns about the manner in which it was attained – for example if there is a later discovery of plagiarism’. The university is seeking ‘specific information’ regarding ‘direct allegations’ of plagiarism and is carrying out its own checks. But the nub of the problem rests not in plagiarism, even if proven, but in an alleged £1.5 million gift from the Libyan régime. The resulting ethical dilemmas range from the rightness of accepting cash from a totalitarian state through to the degree of objectivity that an institution can have if it is beholden to a benefactor with a specific interest in mind.

Research It is interesting that universities are most concerned with ethics, and behaviour which is marked by integrity, in those areas of their work where such standards can be readily imposed on others. Thus, every university now seems to have and to operate a policy of ethics in research delivered through some form of code to which students (and staff) sign up, and administered through an ethics committee. Because of their widespread nature, this paper simply notes some typical examples: (http://www. derby.ac.uk/qed/Policies_Procedures/Research_Ethics_Code.doc; http://www.tvu.ac.uk/files/Research/Ethics%20of%20Research%20 CoP%20updated%20June%2009%20-%20final.pdf ).



The Ethics of Higher Education

41

There are no easy answers in ethics, however. Having a code does not remove the need to apply judgements. Thus it was that Wotjas (2001) drew attention to the case of a sociologist at Glasgow university who was studying paedophilia. She notes: departments frequently endorse professional ethics guides established by bodies such as the British Sociology Association or the British Psychological Society. The Economic and Social Research Council also has a code demanding honesty to both staff and subjects about the purpose, methods and uses of research. Glasgow has from the start defended paedophilia as a research topic. A spokesperson said: ‘Sociologists are interested in researching all aspects of social life and in any area of sociological investigation, researchers need to be able to report accurately on processes or situations and develop scientifically grounded explanations. Given that humans have a wide range of sexual tastes and can follow these in situations where they may be regarded as immoral or illegal, sociological research cannot be restricted to practices that the layperson may regard as “normal”.’ There are other areas of concern. The marketization of universities has inevitably encouraged the growth of contractual work and sponsored activity. As indicated earlier, these provide a source of ethical concern. Ethical procedure demands that the university scrutinize its practice to ensure that it is not conditioned or persuaded towards particular outcomes in order to please the funding agent or secure further contracts. Jibson (2009 on http://ap.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/reprint/30/1/36.pdf), in a teaching milieu, provides some safeguards for universities in this process, and they are relevant also in a research context. These include: preserving the distinctions between what is done for the institution and what is done for the sponsor; full disclosure of financial and other arrangements; retention of control over academic content at all times. Anyone who doubts the need for, or the failure of, ethical behaviour in research might look no further than Baigent and Leigh’s (2006) fascinating analysis of biblical scholarship. A major irony of their story – which includes possible destruction of scholarly evidence; distortion of facts; personal greed; professional ambition of the worst kinds; and a deliberate disregard for truth – is that its context is the apparently staid and allegedly honest world of religion. The narrative of the Dead Sea Scrolls is a warning to us all.

42

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Administration Boje (2008) argues that it is not enough to try to be good or ethical as individuals when it is the systemic processes that must be dealt with. Ethics in public life have to be attended to at the level of people organizing with others to change the social system that is producing the unethical behaviours. Given the clear moves towards marketism in higher education (Elton 2010), this view provides an imperative for the way in which universities are run, through their bureaucracies, to be based on sound ethical principles. Yet the reality is a far cry from this. Increasingly, as Elton maintains, Vice Chancellors throw in their lot with the administrators, running the university on commercial principles regardless of ethical stance. Or, administrators carve out niches for themselves that run counter to the academic personnel and purposes of the university – as if administration were an end in itself and not a relatively small (facilitating) part of a bigger picture. This seemed to be epitomized by a message sent by one university administration, which had just introduced car parking charges, to its staff whose vehicles had been trapped in the car park by a freak snow storm. The semantics say it all: The [administration of X university] has confirmed that members of staff who are unable to move their cars from a University car park tonight because of the adverse weather conditions will not be punished. We can see these trends at work in real events: the librarian who refuses to conduct university visitors around the plant because it is not convenient; the member of the Human Resources department who dismisses a senior member of staff by email notice; the Vice Chancellor who protects the administration from responsibility, even accountability, for their actions though they fly in the face of ethical or employment procedure; the administrator who chooses to give a library pass to one member of the university community and not to another of equal status, identical role but different gender. Such actions lead Stewart (1991) to conclude that: Ethical action in public administration needs to be informed by more than human intuitions. To make correct intuitive judgments about right and wrong, decision makers can be guided by moral philosophy. A good example of guidance in this field is provided by the University of Illinois (2007), which summarizes interpersonal behaviour by administrative and academic staff in these terms:



The Ethics of Higher Education

43

Integrity by maintaining an ongoing dedication to honesty and responsibility Trustworthiness by acting in a reliable and dependable manner Evenhandedness by treating others with impartiality Respect by treating others with civility and decency Stewardship by exercising custodial responsibility for university property and resources Compliance by following state and federal laws and regulations and university policies related to their duties and responsibilities Confidentiality by protecting the integrity and security of university information such as student records, employee files, patient records, and contract negotiation documents On a practical level, what the Illinois Handbook does is to remind us of what Frick (2007: 6) tells us at the empirical, notably: Moral agency . . . was understood as situated within the individual person and not the community. Although values, beliefs, and morality are products and processes of socialization, my interest was in the psychological activity (mind, will, and emotion) of individual persons – both their common and unique understandings and interpretations of the morally unique aspects of the profession of education administration, the expression, ‘the best interests of the student’, and intrapersonal moral discord experienced when faced with value incongruity between oneself and the organization or profession. In other words, administrators – like the rest of us – cannot fall back on the defence of their actions as being the product of the institution rather than of their own chosen – more, or perhaps less, ethical – behaviours. Administrators who behave unethically are not the tools of the immoral institution but the source of its moral failure.

Quality matters Garrison and Borgia (1999) sum up the range of quality issues, beyond those imposed by government, that need to be addressed by universities, particularly in relation to their stakeholders – and make the same point about the centrality of the individual:

44

International Perspectives on Higher Education

In its application to higher education, stakeholder analysis focuses on how to define quality in education and serve the needs of its constituents. This entails forging a consensus between stakeholders in the educational process. Stakeholders include learners, faculty, industry, and the community. By including these stakeholders in defining quality, more useful benchmarks may be created. These benchmarks may include drop out rates, response rates on assignments, student evaluations, the quality of the teaching package, the degree of freedom in pace and content, and the level of independence of the students. While striving to meet the external ‘measures’ of success, as well as improving their distance-learning courses in finance, these authors identify the ethical dimension of student involvement in the generation of courses, so that stakeholders’ needs are met, thus reinforcing the notion that student input is important to the learning environment. This is a point made powerfully by Fisscher and Nijhof (2005: 1): Responsibility is a key concept, both in quality management and in business ethics programmes. Quality cannot be managed successfully without an explicit focus on moral concepts like motivating values, loyalty and sincere attention for each other. At the same time, ethical behaviour in a business environment supposes full quality control. A good balance is needed between control and release and between trust and responsible behaviour. (http://doc.utwente.nl/51019/1/Quality_management_and_business_ ethics_in_congruence_giles_d.pdf) They go on to ask about the role individuals might play in ensuring quality within an institution by asking them to consider: ●●

●● ●●

●● ●●

How satisfied they were with the means of acquiring their skills, knowledge and experience. Whether they felt respected as people and as professionals. Any concerns they might have had for individual employees who could be harmed currently or in the future. Whether they had the time to make the quality system their own. Whether they experienced that the system could be a tool to support them in improving their performance.



The Ethics of Higher Education

45

Summary So we have come full circle, perhaps, in the discussion of the role of ethics in higher education. Ethics asks hard questions about the behaviour and values of institutions and the people who comprise them. It is, relatively, easy to establish some broad principles for steering individual behaviour in moral directions. What is more difficult is to apply the broad principles to individual circumstances and to the circumstances of individuals. Wilcox and Ebbs (1992) talk about this in terms of the ethics of ethos: Morality is not an issue only when problems arise. Responsibility for individual and social welfare is part of the institutional landscape, a daily occurrence manifested in decision making on all levels of the college or university and in the goals toward which the decision making is directed. An ethical analysis that highlights the interconnectedness of all elements in the institution – an ethics of ethos – brings to attention the complexity of the moral life and the subtle nature of responsibility in higher education. It is a tall order but a vital one for universities to promote both the ethics of ethos, and an ethos of ethics.

Postscript: Ethics, political correctness and faith It remains to make some final comments on ethics in the twenty-first century university. There is, one might hypothesize, a trend at work which is erroneous and misleading. That trend is to substitute or confuse ethical behaviour and political correctness. Edelstein (2008) makes the key point: The debate over political correctness is obviously political as well as academic . . . It is important to recast these important educational and cultural debates in less-loaded terms. We can begin by agreeing that concern for diversity, justice, and open inquiry is not merely politically correct but humanly decent. (http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v5n2/) Stark (1997) warns, for example, that political correctness should represent ethical values that promote, not stifle, open inquiry and the pursuit of knowledge free of special interest groups. However righteous political correctness may make its exponents feel, it does not subsume ethics but is subject to ethical

46

International Perspectives on Higher Education

scrutiny. It does not create truth though it may, or may not, be an element within it. But the challenge for the twenty-first century university is beyond the superficial adoption of political correctness, by self-appointed guardians of ‘rightness’, as a cheap alternative to hard issues of personal responsibility. The other issue that has to be faced in this debate is that of the place of faith in formulating ethics, though it is too significant a topic to be rehearsed here. Universities may be faith orientated or they may not. But the contention here is that, in considering ethical behaviour in this context, the principles remain the same. Faith may prescribe a specific approach to ethics; but the common ground between faiths on the broad principles of ethical behaviour is more similar than different. This view was the theme of the Truth in Faith and Ethics Conference (2008), which noted: Anti-consequentialist thinking unites many philosophers with faith to many philosophers without it. Many Christian and non-Christian ethicists today share common concerns (eudaimonism, virtue ethics, deontological prohibitions, tradition and community, natural law and rights, human dignity . . . ). Thus, the absence of a faith dimension (on which many older universities were founded) does not relieve the university of its responsibilities to ethical procedures, and humanist ethical structures are certainly possible (Lamont 1980). So it remains for the leaders of universities to explore the problem and to take action to ensure that their institutions remain ethically viable, for, as Litzky et al. (2006) point out: It remains the job of managers to create an ethical climate that keeps normally honest employees from performing dishonest behaviours. [Acknowledgement: The author would like to thank colleagues around the country and further afield who sent examples for use in this paper. Inevitably they must remain anonymous.]

References Austin, A. and Gamson, Z., Academic Workplace: New Demands, Heightened Tensions, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Report No. 10, Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education, 1983 Baigent, M. and Leigh, R. (2006) The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception London: Arrow Books



The Ethics of Higher Education

47

Boje, D. (2008) Critical Theory Ethics for Business and Public Administration Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Campbell, E. (2003) The Ethical Teacher Maidenhead: OU Press —(2000) ‘Professional ethics in teaching: towards the development of a code of practice’ Cambridge Journal of Education 30 (2) 203–21 Cave, P. (1995) ‘Profit cloaked as ethics’ Times Higher Education Supplement 24 November 1995, available on http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story. asp?storyCode=161347§ioncode=9 Crisp, R. (1998) Ethics In E. Craig ed. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy London: Routledge. Retrieved 20 October 2009, from http://www.rep.routledge.com/ article/L132 Davis, Caroline (2003) Surrey seeks escape from State control Times Higher Education 3 January 2003 available on, http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/ story.asp?storyCode=173887§ioncode=26 accessed 23 October 2009 Docking, J. (2000) New Labour’s Policies for Schools: Raising the Standard? London: David Fulton Elton, L. (2010) Humboldt’s relevance today: collegiality and complexity in Kerry, T. (2010) Meeting the Challenges of Change in Postgraduate Education London: Continuum Franz, N. (2007) Adult education theories: informing Co-operative Extension’s transformation Journal of Extension 45 (1) Frick, W. (2007) ‘Empirical verifications of normative ethical postures and valuation processes in educational leadership’ Values and Ethics in Educational Leadership 6 (1) Garrison, S. and Borgia, D. (1999) ‘Responding to stakeholders in the educational process and the impact on course design’ Journal of Financial and Strategic Decisions Special Edition 1999 Gibbins, J. (2006) Ethics for Higher Education Training and Development University of Newcastle: Council for Industry and Higher Education, available on http:// www.cihe-uk.com/docs/06ethicstrainingmaterial.pdf Hamilton, N. (2002) Academic Ethics Problems and Materials on Professional Conduct and Shared Governance Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger Hugill, B. (1999) ‘Woodhead lied about sex with pupil reveals wife’ Independent (7 March 1999, available on http://www.independent.co.uk/news/woodhead-liedabout-sex-with-pupil-reveals-wife-1078839.html Khaled, Ashraf (2009) Egypt: law tightens government control on higher education University World News 11 January 2009, available on http://www. universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=2009010819044137 accessed 23 October 2009 Lamont, C. (1980) ‘The Affirmative Ethics of Humanism’ The Humanist (40) 2 Litzky, B., Kimberly, A. and Kidder, D. (2006). Academy of Management Perspectives, 20, 91–103. McCluskey, N. and Edwards, C. (2009) ‘Higher Education Subsidies’ CATO Institute paper available on http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/education/ higher-ed-subsidies accessed 20 February 2012 Noble, D. (2002) ‘Technology and the Commodification of Higher Education’

48

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Monthly Review 53 (10) available on http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302noble. htm Novotny, T. and Carlin, D. (2005) Ethical and legal aspects of global tobacco control, available on http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/14/ suppl_2/ii26 accessed 23 October 2009 Orr, D. (2009) ‘The MPs’ expenses row exposes attitude to pay in this country’ Guardian 15 October 2009, available on http://www.guardian.co.uk/ commentisfree/2009/oct/15/mps-expenses-cleaners-low-pay Owen, J. (2011) ‘LSE embroiled in row over authorship of Gaddafi’s son’s PhD thesis and a £1.5m gift to university coffers’ The Independent 27 February 2011 Paechter, C., Preedy, M., Scott, D. and Soler, J. (2001) Knowledge, Power and Learning London: PCP Open University Richardson, V. and Fallona, C. (2001) ‘Classroom management as method and manner’ Journal of Curriculum Studies 33 (6) 705–28 Riley, K. A. (1998) Who’s School Is It Anyway? London: Falmer Press De Russy, C. and Langbert, M. (2005) ‘The corrosion of ethics in higher education’ available on http://www.insdiehighered.com/views/2005/07/05/derussy accessed 20 February 2012 Scott, P. (2004) ‘Ethics “in” and “for” Higher Education’ Higher Education in Europe 29 (4) 439–50 Somerville, M. (2000) The Ethical Canary: Science, Society and the Human Spirit Toronto: Viking Sparrow, A. (2001) ‘Sept 11: “a good day to bury bad news”’ Telegraph 10 October 2001, available on http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1358985/Sept-11a-good-day-to-bury-bad-news.html Stark, C. (1997) ‘Academic Freedom, Political Correctness, and Ethics’ Candian Psychology 38 (4) 232–37 Starrat, R. J. (1994) Building an Ethical School: A Practical Response to the Moral Crisis in Schools London: Falmer Stewart, D. (1991) ‘Theoretical foundations of ethics in public administration’ Administration and Society 23 (3) 357–73 Stringer, M. (2004) ‘University chaplaincy: a strategic presence’ Paper delivered at the Spiritualities and Justice in Learning Communities Conference. Griffith University, Nathan Campus, Brisbane, Australia. July 1–7 , available on http:// www.une.edu.au/dreaming04/papersl.html#stringer Tayler, M. (2006) ‘Parents rebel over Dickensian school run by millionaire friend of Blair’ Guardian 30 May 2006, available on http://www.guardian.co.uk/ uk/2006/may/30/politics.schools Truth and Faith in Ethics (2008) Conference: Sydney, NSW June 2008 accessed on http://www.nd.edu.au/sydney/philosophyconference/index.shtml University of Illinois (2007) Good Ethical Practice: Handbook for Faculty and Staff at the University of Illinois Illinois Ethics Office: University of Illinois Wilcox, J. and Ebbs, S. (1992) The Leadership Compass: Values and Ethics in Higher Education Washington, DC: Washington University, available as ERIC Identifier: ED350970 Wotjas, O. (2001) ‘Academic freedom vs the last taboo’ Times Higher Education Supplement 23 November 2001



The Ethics of Higher Education

49

Internet sources http://ap.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/reprint/30/1/36.pdf http://doc.utwente.nl/51019/1/Quality_management_and_business_ethics_in_ congruence_giles_d.pdf http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/291890.stm http://www.mcgill.ca/files/senate/Steering_Report_Nov_27_with_Attachment. pdf http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302noble.htm http://www.practicalethicsnews.com/practicalethics/2009/09/academic-freedomisnt-free.html http://www.responsible-business.com/design.html http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v5n2/ http://www.woodbury.edu/s/131/index.aspx?sid=131&gid=1&pgid=1868 www.aare.edu.au/conf03nc/03025z.pdf www.ugs.usf.edu/gened/university20%education20%final.pdf

Chapter 2

Academic Freedom: A Medieval Concept for a Twenty-first Century University? Trevor Kerry and Carolle Kerry

Introduction The previous chapter on ethics in higher education raised, in passing, the issue of academic freedom. This chapter sets out to examine the notion of academic freedom in more detail. In so doing it will pursue four approaches. First, the chapter will consider the origins of academic freedom; next it will examine academic freedom as it appears in the contemporary literature, pointing up the extremely wide range of approaches which are covered by the descriptor. Third, we will look at the philosophical underpinning of the concept of freedom to try to define more precisely what might be meant by it, and what the implications are, therefore, for trying to compile a workable concept of academic freedom. Fourth, this hypothetical concept of academic freedom will be examined in the light of real and potential examples drawn from the day-to-day lives of academics and of universities in order to test its validity in practice.

Background: Understanding academic freedom ‘Academic freedom – the responsibility to speak your mind and challenge conventional wisdom – defines the university and stands as a model for open debate in wider society’; thus runs the mission statement of Academics for Academic Freedom (AFAF 2009). The debate is broadened by the view that signatories to the AFAF statement believe that ‘academics, both inside and outside the classroom, have unrestricted liberty to question and test received wisdom and to put forward controversial and unpopular opinions, whether or not these are deemed offensive’. It continues ‘academic institutions have no right to curb the exercise of this freedom by members of their staff, or to use it as grounds for disciplinary action or dismissal’ (AFAF 2009).



Academic Freedom

51

Such overt statements go beyond the more restrained view expressed in the European Universities Association 1988 Magna Charta Universitatum statement that ‘(f)reedom in research and training is the fundamental principle of university life, and governments and universities . . . must ensure respect for this fundamental requirement’ (EUA 1988). More recently some UK and overseas universities have become embroiled in the controversies surrounding the academic freedom of their staff (Hayes 2009: 128; Rochford 2003: 249) while others have outlined their expectations of their staff who are engaged in teaching, writing and research. Exeter University (2009) is succinct in what it sees as the university’s responsibility: The University will maintain the academic freedom of staff undertaking academic activities. That is to say, freedom of teaching and discussion, freedom in carrying out research and disseminating and publishing the results thereof, freedom from institutional censorship and freedom to participate in professional or representative academic bodies (University of Exeter 2009) But with the ‘freedoms’ thus granted, the university is explicit in what it expects of its academic staff in that it outlines staff responsibilities to each other and to the institution: Staff undertaking academic activities should recognize that the exercise of rights carries with it special duties and responsibilities, including the obligation to respect the academic freedom of other members of the academic community and to ensure the fair discussion of contrary views and Academic freedom carries with it the duty to use that freedom in a manner consistent with the scholarly obligation to base research on an honest search for truth. Teaching, research and scholarship should be conducted in full accordance with ethical and professional standards (ibid.). Academic freedom, then, is not without its controversies.

52

International Perspectives on Higher Education

A brief history of academic freedom This chapter is intended in part to examine the literature of academic freedom, the controversies that are apparent therein and to interrogate the findings against the philosophical and ethical underpinning of university and academic life and concludes by discussing the implications of academic freedom in the second decade of the twenty-first century. In effect, the hope is to try to understand how the ancient term ‘academic freedom’ impinges upon the life and work of academics and students of the twenty-first century. But first it is pertinent to consider the origins of academic freedom, though even these are disputed. Do they lie primarily in the theological medieval universities (Hoye 1997; Thorens 2006) or are they more securely placed in the Enlightenment from where the transition from the religious to the scientific method of analysing phenomena in the pursuit of knowledge emanated? The birthplace of academic freedom and the Age of Enlightenment Hoye (1997) and Thorens (2006) argue that the birthplace of academic freedom lies firmly rooted in the origins of the fledgling universities of the 1200s, ‘one of those cultural values shaped, or at least influenced by, the Christian religion’ (Hoye 1997), and ‘the historical origin of university autonomy and academic freedom goes back to the High Middle Ages’ (Thorens 2006: 92). At a time when the Church enjoyed an extraordinary degree of influence over the education infrastructure of Europe, the notion of academic freedom came from within the newly founded universities of, e.g. Oxford, Paris and Bologna. Almost inevitably, academic freedom became a contentious issue between the state and institutions, with challenges both issued and resisted (Hoye 1997: 414). Karran (2009: 18) highlights that the first universities: (s)truggled to escape persecution for asserting their rights of self governance and the pursuit of scholarship and teaching without censure or constraint. But with the autonomy of the medieval universities perceived to be an integral part of their rationale, then, as now, they struggled against the external constraints upon their ‘pursuit of scholarship and teaching’ (ibid.)



Academic Freedom

53

by advertising their particular strengths and individuality; thus, in 1229 the University of Toulouse promised ‘freedom’ in a bid to attract new scholars: ‘What then will you lack? Scholastic liberty? By no means, since here you can enjoy your own liberty tied to no-one’s apron strings’ (Denifle and Chatelain (eds) 1889, quoted in Hoye 1997: 414). Nor must one forget the religious dimension: the original students were predominantly clerics, as were their tutors. Thus the origins of both the university and academic freedom are interwoven with the history and practice of the medieval church. The eighteenth century, the Age of Enlightenment, is held to be the source of such ideas as the centrality of freedom, democracy and reason being the fundamental tenets of the values of a democratic society. The Enlightenment encapsulates the view or belief that modern science, and our understanding of the social world derived from modern science, can help us to improve the living conditions on this planet. From the perspective of academic freedom, Immanuel Kant paved the way for the Enlightenment to appear to give this concept validation: Nothing is required for this enlightenment, however, except freedom; and the freedom in question is the least harmful of all, namely, the freedom to use reason publicly in all matters.

The debate today In modern times the debate about academic freedom has been characterized more by heat than light, leading Birtwistle (2006: 208) to ask: ‘Is there a “gold standard” of what academic freedom is and how it should be safeguarded?’ Nixon et al. (2001: 234) suggest there has been ‘conceptual slippage’. One can trace within these discussions a number of recurrent themes. At the more moderate end of the spectrum we find some attempts to define the concept and to place it within other known frameworks such as national law. Fuller (2009: 165), for example, posits: ‘Academic freedom’ refers to a system of complementary rights and obligations entitled to teachers and students as free inquirers. It is rooted in the late Roman legal classification of universities with guilds, churches, monastic orders and city-states as indefinitely self-reproducing, selfgoverning social entities dedicated to activities whose value transcends

54

International Perspectives on Higher Education

the interests of their current practitioners ... Even in the thirteenth century the idea was controversial because members of such corporate bodies were largely immune from laws to which they would have been normally subject as members of particular families or residents of particular fiefdoms. But the level of controversy was raised further when academic freedom was made the cornerstone of the modern national university by Wilhelm von Humboldt in 1810. But Birtwistle himself (2006: 214) notes: The haphazard collection of laws in the UK that cover aspects of what make up academic freedom with no single defining statement in law. Some approaches seem imbued with sweet reason as a way of winning over converts, but a kind of paranoia soon creeps in. This is exemplified in Badley (2009: 161): A university should be the best place of all where teachers enact the freedom to speak and where students learn their own ways of speaking even if they speak in ways which its managers and governors might dislike. This sentiment reminds us of Waterman’s (1992: 119) warning that ‘balancing ideals with the real world is a tricky business’ in this field. There can be no doubt that, underlying this conflict of view, lies a principle of some importance – what Ivie calls (2009: 53) ‘the indispensable principle of scholarship’ defined as exercising independent intellectual judgement. But the problem is this: many authors in this field are motivated by a desire to extend the principle from the reasoned and reasonable to the unreasoned and unreasonable. Nixon et al. are right to question whether this movement is anything other than ‘an attempt to protect the interests of a particular occupational group’ (2001: 234). The literature of academic freedom is littered with examples of a siege mentality, of righteous academics defending society from some ill-defined (or imaginary) ideological threat. Rochford (2010: 259) epitomizes this genre: No amount of transparency can reveal the subtle pressures on an academic to conform, and the university, in league with the government



Academic Freedom

55

on this question, is neither obliged nor inclined to provide the type of analysis necessary to provide informed debate on this question. There are many answers to the academic’s lament over the loss of freedom they have experienced over the years. The most obvious is that the freedom was an excuse – for sloth, for inefficiency, for irrelevance, for idiosyncrasy. Following that is the ‘rubbish of the past’ argument, that old methods must make way for new efficiencies, and that the new environment must be met with new methods. Academic freedom is portrayed as a luxury in the hands of a few, and the jealous zealots of economic efficiency rage against the participation of a few in such an occupational lurk. It is difficult for an academic to answer such arguments without appearing to be self-serving. The problem is this: academic freedom is not for the benefit of the academic, or even of the institution. It is for the benefit of society at large. Ivie (2009: 54) enhances the emotive language, accusing ‘rightwing ideologues’ of ‘flushing unfettered scholarly enquiry down the memory hole along with any other inclination toward independent thought’. Others, such as Grable (1973: 221) do at least attempt an analysis for the pressures that they see to be responsible for freedom’s erosion: While the forces impinging upon academic freedom are both varied and diverse, at least three seem especially significant: these three – unionization of the faculty; politicization of the university; and certain forms of governmental activity – are prophetic indicators for the future course of higher education and for those who teach in it. Corbyn (2010) quotes Fuller (2009) in his attempt to extend academic freedom or, at least, the freedom of academics, beyond their areas of expertise, to protect the ‘figure of the professor as a “public intellectual”’: Academic freedom isn’t simply the right to speak within your expertise: it is the right to speak about anything – but in a way that involves an appeal to reason, argument and evidence. But if academic freedom is indeed a defensible entity and is genuinely under threat, whither the threats? There is little agreement here. Corbyn (2010) notes that academics see them from the political right. Kok et al. (2010) cite managerialism, competition for student numbers, university ethos and administrative structures. Ivie balmes the political left (2009:

56

International Perspectives on Higher Education

54). Barrow (2009: 189) rages against ‘political correctness’, the ‘language police’, and ‘the incoherent postmodern bandwagon’. Very few studies revert to the empirical. An exeption is that of A˚kerlind et al. (2010: 340), who suggest: An inclusive hierarchy of awareness of different aspects of academic freedom emerged from the analysis, based on two primary dimensions of variation: the types of constraints regarded as an appropriate part of academic freedom; and the role of internal and external factors in creating academic freedom. Five qualitatively different ways of understanding academic freedom emerged, represented as the following five categories: (1) an absence of constraints on academics’ activities; (2) an absence of constraints, within certain self-regulated limits; (3) an absence of constraints, within certain externally-regulated limits; (4) an absence of constraints, combined with active institutional support; and (5) an absence of constraints, combined with responsibilities on the part of academics. So what can be deduced from this review of contemporary debate about academic freedom? Probably that tighter definition would help focus the arguments; and this might be combined with some attempt to deconstruct the reasoning behind the concept. Above all, that the debate needs to be freed from its more hysterical expressions and from the a priori assumptions that seem to bedevil it.

Deconstructing academic freedom So far, we have tried to summarize the latest thinking and application of the principles of academic freedom. The problem with the articulation of any noble sentiment is that it can too quickly be accepted at face value. It seems likely that few of us would deny that the principle that ‘universal education is a good thing’ – at least on first encounter with the sentiment. Yet this simplistic statement masks precisely the problems we have in discussing academic freedom. Without knowing the content and nature of that ‘education’, without a definition and shared understand of ‘the good’, and without contextualizing the situation of the ‘universal’ beings who are to be educated in these undefined ways, the judgement becomes high-sounding but worthless. This is precisely the dilemma inherent in the



Academic Freedom

57

notion of academic freedom as it is often presented. What we intend to do, therefore, in what follows, is to try to define terms more closely (to take a more philosophical stance on the issue), and to proceed to consider the practical implications of these deliberations in the day-to-day world of the working university. It seems opportune to begin this process with a look at some of the vocabulary of (academic) freedom: with the notion of freedom itself, and with the terms liberty and licence which are often associated with it. Each of the words – freedom, liberty and licence – has its peculiar nuances. Liberty is probably the most high-sounding of the three terms. If freedom relates to what I do as an individual, then liberty is the big picture of what people/citizens/mankind do(es) in society. Liberty is the bedrock of freedom. To understand academic freedom we need to know the principles of liberty that underpin it. So what are those principles? Berlin (1990) made a distinction between positive liberty and negative liberty. Positive liberty suggests that the individual has both the opportunity and the power to act. This is what Hobbes (Van Mill 2000) described thus: ‘a free man is he that ... is not hindered to do what he hath the will to do.’ Negative liberty (= freedom from constraint) implies that there is no tyrannical or other restraint on his/her action: the individual is not under threat for his/her actions. These two facets of liberty are often – in the real world – held in some degree of tension. A student may be ‘free’ to demonstrate against the imposition of university fees; but the student’s protest may have boundaries imposed by the State. Thus he may be free to march, wave a placard, shout slogans, but he may be prevented (even by force) from spraying paint as a mark of dissent with the policy. Thus one could argue that the student has positive freedom, and one might argue that he has negative freedom within certain boundaries, but the fluidity and, often, undefined nature of those boundaries raises the issue of the philosophical (and ultimately, ethical) limits to his liberty. Again, an example is useful. A student belongs to the university’s club for comedy and revue writing. He has liberty to provide comedy scripts and perform them (positive liberty). There is no constraint, either within the university or outside it, to his activity (negative liberty). But – and it is a significant ‘but’ – two factors may control, in practice, the content of his scripts. The first would be if the content of the script were to break legislation about, for example, racial incitement. The second, and more subtle, would be if audiences (i.e. society) were to judge the scripts to be less than politically correct (though not illegal) and stay away from performances. So, as in life generally, liberty is constrained in practice by both formal and informal

58

International Perspectives on Higher Education

means. Further, as the sponsoring body of this putative student comic, the university which hosted him might attract the attention of either the law or of public opprobrium by association, and it may be expected to take a stance on the issue of the student’s conduct (to put a barrier on his liberty). Philosophically, the notion of liberty has often been defined by negative freedoms. Thus, it is common to think of ‘freedoms’ rather than liberty in the singular. These freedoms are: ●● ●●

●●

●● ●●

Economic: the freedom to work, earn and follow a trade or profession. Personal: the freedom to move about freely and/or to follow one’s own conscience. Political: the freedom to be enfranchised and have a say in the forms, mechanisms and personnel of government. Civil: the freedom to enjoy specific, constitutionally protected rights. Social and cultural: the freedom to consort, and enjoy respect, within society.

Academic freedom crosses over the boundaries between these notions: academics are free to pursue their profession, to move about openly in the pursuit of their work, to consort with whom they wish, to challenge received wisdom, to adopt their chosen political or social positions by dint of intellectual argument, and to communicate their views without hindrance or persecution. They are free to do these things without external coercion or pressure. Yet ‘the history of liberty has always involved groups of people winning immunities from external control’ (Stevens 2003 http://faculty. ncwc.edu/mstevens/410/410lect05/htm). At the end of this line of thought we are moving to a position in which it becomes important to recognize that the ideal of liberty is not one of absolute value: absolute liberty is, in effect, merely another term for anarchy. Personal liberty needs a context. At the macro level that context includes concepts such as humanity and society and, at another level, issues such as law, responsibility and goodness. These contexts may furnish a high degree of negative freedom, but they are not constraint-free; in other words, they are boundary posts that help to define the limits within which liberty may be exercised before anarchy and chaos set in. Berdahl (1990: 171) makes this point effectively in discussing the relationships between academic freedom, autonomy and accountability: Taken most simply, autonomy in its complete sense means that power to govern without outside controls and accountability means



Academic Freedom

59

the requirement to demonstrate responsible actions to some external constituenc(y)ies. In theory, the argument has been made that there is no necessary incompatibility between being both highly autonomous and rigorously accountable; in practice, one senses that usually where more accountability is required, less autonomy remains. The ideal to be sought seems clearly a balance of both conditions. Too much autonomy might lead to universities unresponsive to society; too much accountability might destroy the necessary academic ethos. But so far, we have taken our examples from the world of behaviour. Let us consider the world of thought and ideas, within which the university holds a prime place. Mill (1859) grappled with the liberty of thought. Positive liberty might be taken to imply that an academic can think, and by extension teach, whatever he/she wishes. Mill’s case puts one set of arguments against such a view: What Cicero practised as the means of forensic success, requires to be imitated by all who study any subject in order to arrive at the truth. He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side; if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion. The rational position for him would be suspension of judgment, and unless he contents himself with that, he is either led by authority, or adopts, like the generality of the world, the side to which he feels most inclination. Nor is it enough that he should hear the arguments of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. This is not the way to do justice to the arguments, or bring them into real contact with his own mind. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them; who defend them in earnest, and do their very utmost for them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form; he must feel the whole force of the difficulty which the true view of the subject has to encounter and dispose of, else he will never really possess himself of the portion of truth which meets and removes that difficulty. Mill emphasized the need for academics to understand not just their own arguments and intellectual positions, but those of others who held different views. Implicit in this ‘knowing’ is also a transparency: a need for teachers to open the eyes of their learners to the ranges of opinion,

60

International Perspectives on Higher Education

evidence and debate that are available – while even such a exponent of academic freedom as Fuller (2009) admits that academics are not the most reliable guardians of it. In a sense, transparency is a boundary marker against propagandizing – even of the views one holds most dear one’s self. So if there are to be constraints of this kind to intellectual liberty and the liberty of action (e.g. teaching), apart from obvious legal markers, what are these principles and where do they originate from? Hyland (2011), albeit from an overtly Christian perspective, tried to provide an answer to this question in the form of his ‘Five Laws’: 1 2 3 4 5

Remember the past. Embrace the truth. Respect humanity. Exercise self-control (restraint). Protect and serve others.

For many, problems with Hyland’s book will revolve around its powerfully evangelical underpinning and its rooted-ness in American culture. Yet, if all this can be left aside, its central message has merit. Consider this view in the wider context of society. Liberty is not absolute: but if it is to be constrained then the principles that constrain it must be articulated. While those principles may be made by some commentators to be simplistic, they are never simple. When, for example, does remembering the past slip from an intelligent use of context for decision-making into mere adherence to tradition? Pilate’s great question ‘What is truth?’ still rings unanswered (and unanswerable) down the ages. Respect for humanity seems an obvious criterion for action but are there exceptions, situations where an individual has committed (an) act(s) so terrible as to put himself beyond respect? Self-control is a matter of judgement; to revert to the biblical basis of Hyland’s argument: did not even Jesus overthrow the tables of those whom he conceived to be defiling the deity’s place? Likewise, service is laudable and a desirable ambition, but even the most diligent servant of mankind has to make judgements about whom to serve, when, in what ways, and according to what priorities. So the notion of liberty continues to evade being tied down to a definition that defies ambiguity. Nor does the idea of licence as an alternative form of nomenclature make the situation any easier. Licence may suggest one of two opposite approaches. First, it may suggest the freedom of the individual to ‘do what he likes’; yet we have already seen that this is not viable against the realities of living in a society. Second, it may suggest a form of authority:



Academic Freedom

61

the individual can be ‘licensed’ by some third party to act in particular ways while others (who are less qualified on particular criteria) are forbidden to undertake the same acts. In extremis, the individual may not kill but the executioner may carry out a judicial sentence: one is free to take a life, the other is not.

Academic freedom in the real world Applied to the academic world, all of these same issues and conflicts resonate. Academic freedom – if it means anything – cannot mean absolute liberty. There are boundaries, and those boundaries are defined by a variety of factors: moral, ethical, societal, fiscal, institutional. Denying the boundaries leads either to anarchy or to emotional romantic pre-modernism, after Hayes (2009: 144): Academics have a choice. To become another profession with no ‘noble’ goals, or to accept the responsibility to defend free speech and academic freedom and hope to make the ivory tower a beacon for the defence of freedom in wider society. The choice between the noble and the ignoble is yours. The constraints we have suggested operate in contexts which include those determined by the need to manage (and be managed within) the institution, the parameters of employment practice, and the necessity of meeting expectations from clients (i.e. students) and others. So what can academic freedom mean to an academic against the reality of this backdrop? Answering this question led Badley (2009: 158) to argue: The notion of ‘ideopolis’ should also help reconstitute the university as a democratic agora where students and teachers would gather to talk and learn and ‘to argue through and argue out what it means to be active citizens in a democratic society’ (see Martin 2000). This would reject the university as merely a place where learners are constructed as economic beings and prepared for lives as workers and consumers and where teachers serve the economy as traders and trainers in the educational marketplace. Instead the university as agora should promote a different discourse of democratic citizenship where students are enabled in conditions of academic freedom to reconstruct their own lives as social actors and political agents. This would recreate the university as a place

62

International Perspectives on Higher Education

where students learn to become active, autonomous, critical and even dissenting citizens in a strong democracy. The university as agora would rebuild itself as a critical and creative space where students and staff could meet and learn in order to make democracy work and to find new ways of making sense of the world (editor’s emphasis). Badley’s use of the term agora to denote a debating, dissenting group, with disparate opinions, is perhaps fortuitous because it moves the discussion away from the most common descriptor of the academic body – the academy. This now commonly employed phrase seems to cover a variety of meanings: it can signify all the tutors in a faculty, in a university or in universities collectively. Its users are not prone to define it too closely, but they are adept at identifying its alleged viewpoints. Our contention, on the other hand, is that it is a spurious, even meaningless concept. Quite simply: the academy does not exist. A group of academics either at the micro or the macro level has no more reality as a coherent entity than would a similar grouping of doctors, or of hoteliers or of road-menders. The members of such a grouping might share common interests (or self-interests), but a member of their group would be as individual, would embrace as wide a range of attitudes, approaches or opinions (professional or non-professional), and behave as uniquely, as would any other individual within a cluster of human beings. To try to establish a quasi-autonomous identity of this nature for any professional group (even academics), and then to attribute to it a consistent and detached set of behaviours which distinguish its members collectively from some broader notion of society, is simply fanciful. The notion of a ‘pure academic’ or the body of the ‘academy’ vs the tainted (dogmatic) society is, simply, a myth. Perhaps one of the reasons that the notion of academy fails to work is the lack of a professional body for academics which is comparable to the General Medical Council (GMC) for doctors. While the government attempted to establish such a being in 2000 with the Institute for Learning and Teaching (ILT) – which quickly morphed into the Higher Education Academy (HEA) – the latter organization does not have the authority of a GMC. Even for school teachers, where the General Teaching Council notionally has disciplinary powers, the lead body has a chequered history and little status even within the profession. HEA has become largely a qualifications mill attempting to remedy the fact that academics can secure posts with no proven skill as teachers of students despite high, personal academic achievement. Teaching professionals of any kind are notoriously difficult to marshal into any coherent group, apparently preferring instead



Academic Freedom

63

a disparate array of union memberships. Where ILT and HEA have feared to tread it is largely inconceivable that the vaguer notion of academy should step out boldly. By contrast, when controversy blew up about the MMR (mumps, measles and rubella) vaccine, the GMC was quick to act. As Goldacre (2010) reported: It’s certainly clear that Andrew Wakefield and his co-defendants failed to meet the high standards required of doctors in research. The GMC found he was ‘misleading’ ‘dishonest’ and ‘irresponsible; in the way he described where the children in the 1998 paper came from, by implying that they were routine clinic referrals. As the GMC has also found, these children were subjected to a programme of unpleasant and invasive tests which were not performed in their own clinical interest, but rather for research purposes, and these tests were conducted without ethics committee approval. So, if academics do not (as we have seen above) have unfettered intellectual liberty, and are not members of a well-defined, universally recognized and autonomous group (the academy) either within or beyond their own institutions, what future is there for the notion of academic freedom? Certainly the most recent public debates about universities have been fee-centred. This is not the place to conduct such a debate: the facts speak for themselves. The national government has allowed a situation to develop in which UK regions (e.g. Scotland) can determine that Scottish students do not pay fees, while in England students will be debt-burdened for most of their working lives to pay back fees retrospectively. This has shifted the onus of accountability by university staff from the macro level – a general accountability of universities to the societies that fund and support them – to the micro level – a specific accountability to every student who has become a fee-paying client of the system. Unpalatable as it may be for academics to have their freedom curtailed by a market-led world, this is now unavoidable in England – or anywhere with a similar fiscal system. The real notion of the learning landscape (Neary and Thody 2009) is no longer about WiFi in students’ canteens, it has been redefined as a customer–provider relationship. This relationship operates at every level. It affects the individual tutor conducting a lecture with a group or leading an individual tutorial – the clients (whether they are defined as the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills – where higher education resides anonymously

64

International Perspectives on Higher Education

within the government’s thinking – or as Miss/Mr Jones toting an essay) want value for money. It affects the institution, which has to market itself to draw in clients and which in turn expects staff to recruit, teach, tutor and deliver results (whether through personal research or successful courses) in ways that are customer/client orientated. It is hard – probably impossible – to evade the notion that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Universities – and their academic employees – now dance to many tunes and have few freedoms to call any of them. Marketism has been the birth-place also of managerialism. Elton (2010) bemoans the growth of this form of university governance. His analysis of it is correct, but it is inevitable. If an institution has, as a major purpose, to provide value for money, and evidence of providing value for money, then it has to be managed to that end. If that institution is a university, then the managers of the university must put in place systems that deliver value: it is simply a matter of survival – which in turn means jobs. So Vice-Chancellors become more business-orientated; they employ more departments to generate and run the university as a business; and they require academics to be business-like and deliver business intentions. Delivering business plans inevitably collides with the notion of academic freedom. Who now decides matters academic? Not ‘the academy’. Not academics. The business managers: albeit they still label themselves Professors and Pro-Vice Chancellors rather than corporate managers. Even Rorty (1996: 21), who wants to defend notions of academic freedom, has to admit: These customs and traditions insulate colleges and universities from politics and from public opinion. In particular, they insulate teachers from pressure from the public bodies or private boards who pay their wages. The failure of freedom spills out beyond the university’s walls, too. When academics are recruited to undertake tasks in the public domain they are expected to behave according to public norms, not notions of academic freedom. Big business may provide clever academics with money to carry out research, but it is task-orientated research, not some programme of their own devising. Clients of research may expect a particular slant on the research. Dare one say it? They may expect even particular outcomes. So it is not just freedom that is compromised but even, perhaps, integrity. Nor is it any different (in our view) if Dr Brainbox, who works for TopUni, wins a grant from Best Buttery Corp to spend some of his time investigating the health-giving properties of Best Buttery’s products, or if Dr Brainbox



Academic Freedom

65

leaves the university and works in-house for Best Buttery Corp. Academic freedom to conduct research demands absolute detachment; money may signal compromise in any context. A very public example of government expectation of academics happened not so long ago on the important and serious issue of drug usage and related to the government’s Advisory Council on the Mis-use of Drugs (ACMD) which he chaired. According to the Guardian (2010), Professor David Nutt: was dismissed from the post after criticising politicians for distorting research evidence and claiming alcohol and tobacco were more harmful than some illegal drugs, including LSD, ecstasy and cannabis. Nutt set up his own, new committee – the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs (ISCD) – which included a number of experts in the field. By contrast, Nutt claimed that ACMD was emasculated scientifically, following the resignations of five of its members in sympathy with him – four of whom joined his ISCD. The ISCD’s agenda was said to mirror that of the original committee but would provide greater independence to speak freely. One could construe this series of events as characterized by naivete: surely, in taking the queen’s shilling in the guise of government support, it was obvious that the government would expect to have its view on how the committee might operate. That it might have wanted more – i.e. control over the outcomes – is precisely the moral danger into which all sponsorship leads. If there is a threat to academic freedom it may come from quite other directions and be more insidious. We become somewhat alarmed at the way technology is encroaching on individualism in academic life and, potentially, even the distinctivness of institutions. The exponents of so-called ‘academic commons’ would seem to believe that individuals’ intellectual property (their ideas, work, planning, courses even their thoughts via wikis, etc.) should be openly and publicly available on the world-wide web. Further, at least some versions of this view suggest that access to these should be open to all; and that, once posted, they may be taken, used adapted, recycled and remodelled ad infinitum by others. Even Watling (2009: 83), a fan of technology, describes it as ‘an invasive medium’ – something of an understatement, perhaps. It is significant, one suspects, that the key definitions of academic commons play down such insights (cf. http://academiccommons.org/about-academic-commons). So, in summary, what can we say about academic freedom as a concept to guide the university of the twenty-first century?

66

International Perspectives on Higher Education

As an ideology, it is flawed insofar as it demands an almost open-ended permission for academics to plough their own furrows regardless of the institution which pays them – indeed, even regardless any offence an academic may cause to society. Intellectually, one can sustain a case that academics should be as free as every other citizen to pursue truth and to express it. Badley’s agora is entirely apt, but there is no obvious case that academics are, or should be, more capable or more committed to do this than anyone else. Truth is truth wherever it resides. Arguing that academics should enjoy some kind of ‘parliamentary privilege’ to say whatever they wish with no accountability can have little justification; to say that they should do so (pace Fuller) even in areas beyond their expertise would be humorous if it were less serious. It is worth reflecting that it is a very short ride from the rejection of accountability to an existence beyond the law. Pragmatically, academics are employees. Their wages are paid directly by the university and indirectly by the government, which means the tax-payer. There is, therefore, no logical reason why academic freedom should operate beyond and outside the boundaries of the management constraints of the institution and the employment requirements of the country. What the proponents of academic freedom have tried to do, in our view, is to establish a ‘them and us’ culture, where the reward of intellect is distance from legimate authority. This gap between academics and others is unsustainable in practice and indefensible in theory. The desire to join the world of the ivory-towered academic may have been a fair aspiration in medieval times, and the idea may have lasted with some semblence of public goodwill down to the era of Miss Marple twitching her curtains in St Mary Mead, when Oxbridge reigned supreme. But in a world of increasing population, greater pressure on qualifications and quality assurance, increased fiscal awareness, and all-round public franchise with its legitimate demands for accountability, this particular bird in a gilded cage turns out to be a dodo.

References AFAF (Academies for Academic Freedom) (2009) accessed on www.afaf.org.uk on 1 June 2011 Åkerlind, Gerlese S. and Kayrooz, Carole (2003) ‘Understanding academic freedom: the views of social scientists’ Higher Education Research & Development 22 (3) 327–44 Badley, G. (2009) ‘A place from where to speak: the university and academic freedom’ British Journal of Educational Studies 57 (2) 146–63



Academic Freedom

67

Barrow, R. (2009) ‘Academic freedom: its nature, extent and value’ British Journal of Educational Studies 57 (2) 178–90 Berdahl, R. (1990) ‘Academic freedom, autonomy and accountability in British universities’ Studies in Higher Education 15 (2) 169–80 Berlin, I. (1990) Four Essays on Liberty. New York: Oxford University Press. Birtwistle, T. (2006) ‘Are we collectively guilty of complacency? An update on the continued confusion over what is academic freedom and what may become a battle for academic freedom’ Education and the Law 18 (2) 207–15 Corbyn, Z. (2010) ‘A clear and present danger’ Times Higher Educational Supplement 11 February 2010 Denifle, H. and Chatelaine, A. (eds) (1889) Chatolarium Universitatis Parisiencesis no. 32: Paris Elton, L. (2010) ‘Humboldt’s relevance today’ in Kerry, T. (2010) Meeting the Challenges of Change in Postgraduate Education London: Continuum pp 73–88 EUA (1998) Magna Charta Universitatum Bologna: European Universities Association Fuller, S. (2009) ‘The genealogy of judgement: towards a deep history of academic freedom’ British Journal of Educational Studies 57 (2) 164–77 Goldacre, B. (2010) ‘Expert view: the media are equally guilty over the MMR vaccine scare’ Guardian 28 January 2010 Grable, J. (1973) ‘Is academic freedom dying?’ Peabody Journal of Education 50 (3) 220–5 Hayes, D. (2009) ‘Academic freedom and the diminished subject’ British Journal of Educational Studies 57 (2) 127–45 Hoye, W. (1997) ‘The religious roots of academic freedom’ Theological Studies 58, 409–28 Hyland, S. (2011) The Five Laws of Liberty: Towards a Biblical View of Freedom Chattanooga: AMG Publishers Ivie, Robert L. (2005) ‘A presumption of academic freedom’ Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies 27 (1) 53–85 Karran, T. (2009) ‘Academic freedom: essential liberty or extravagant luxury?’ in Bell. L., Stevenson, H. and Neary, M. (2009) The Future of Higher Education: Policy, Pedagogy and the Student Experience London: Continuum pp. 17–29 Kok, S., Douglas, A., McClelland, B. and Bryde, D. (2010) ‘The move towards managerialism: perceptions of staff in “traditional” and “new” UK universities’, Tertiary Education and Management 16 (2) 99–113 Martin, I. (2000) ‘Reconstituting the agora: towards an alternative politics of lifelong learning’, AERC 2000: an international conference: proceedings of the 41st annual Adult Education Research Conference, Department of Educational Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada Mill, J. S. (1859) On Liberty California: Filiquarian Publishing Neary, M. and Thody, A. (2009) ‘Learning landscapes: designing a classroom of the future’ in Bell. L., Stevenson, H. and Neary, M. (2009) The Future of Higher Education: Policy, Pedagogy and the Student Experience London: Continuum pp. 30–41 Nixon, J., Marks, A., Rowland, S. and Walker, M. (2001) ‘Towards a new academic professionalism: a manifesto of hope’ British Journal of Sociology of Education 22 (2) 227–44

68

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Rochford, Francine (2003) ‘Academic freedom as insubordination: the legalisation of the academy’ Education and the Law 15 (4) 249–62, 2–10 Rorty, R. (1996) ‘Does academic freedom have philosophical pre-suppositions?’ in Menand, L. (ed.) The Future of Academic Freedom Chicago: University of Chicago Press pp 21–42 Stevens, M. (2003) The Philosophical Concept of Freedom available on (http:// faculty.ncwc.edu/mstevens/410/410lect05/htm) accessed 3 June 2011 Thorens, J. (2006) ‘Liberties, freedom and autonomy: a few reflections on academia’s state’ Higher Education Policy 19, 87–110 University of Exeter (2009) Agreement on Academic Freedom available on www.exeter. ac.uk accessed 17 June 2011 Van Mill, D. (2000) ‘Hobbes and the limits of freedom’. Paper for the Australasian Political Studies Association available on http://apsa2000.anu.edu.au/ confpapers/vanmill.rtf accessed 17 June 2011 Waterman, Stanley (1992) ‘Academic freedom and the freedom of academics’ Journal of Geography in Higher Education 16 (1) 115–19 Watling, S. (2009) ‘Technology-enhanced learning: a new digital divide?’ in Bell. L., Stevenson, H. and Neary, M. (2009) The Future of Higher Education: Policy, Pedagogy and the Student Experience London: Continuum pp 83–98

Chapter 3

Religion and Spirituality in Student Life Tom Sherwood

Introduction While the preceding chapters dealt with ethics in higher education generally, and with the specific issues of academic freedom including its ethical domains, the current chapter examines the separate but related notion of spirituality. Society is ambivalent about this topic. On the one hand, it seems to want its developing citizens to adopt ethical stances, and to respond appropriately to situations of awe and wonder. On the other hand, it remains fearful of religion in the guise of extremism. This chapter explores the religious dimension in the formation of values for young people in higher education, and specifically the evolving role of the chaplaincy in facilitating responses to the spiritual dimension.

The situation Stendahl’s (1963: 521) statement of nearly 50 years ago – ‘Any discussion about the place of religion in the American university is fraught with much confusion’ – continues to be true in western institutions of higher education, not only in the USA, but in Europe and around the world. To the surprise of some educators, religion and spirituality have not disappeared from university life in the twenty-first century. In fact, chaplains and campus ministries have become more important in this generation, especially since 9/11. Many universities have increased support for chaplaincy, appointed new chaplains from more religious traditions, and established multi-faith centres to support and enrich the student experience. These moves are sometimes understood to be recruitment and retention strategies. Recent research indicates that the change is more complex than twentieth-century theories of secularization anticipated. In global society,

70

International Perspectives on Higher Education

it is an era of both secularization and fundamentalism, of both decline in religious participation rates and an increase in spiritual searching and expression. It is a time to say: ‘All generalizations are wrong, including this one.’ What happened to secularization? For one thing, it has had too many definitions. The term is used to describe the decline of religious participation, the decline of religious influence in society, the separation of religion from public life, and the loss of a sense of the numinous. These are related phenomena, but distinct. Some theorists suggest that the observed trends do not constitute decline as much as a transformation in the expression of human spirituality. Peter L. Berger has even speculated that there is now a process of ‘de-secularization’ (1999). At the 2007 Conference of European University Chaplains, Erik Borgman of Tilburg University suggested ‘it is probably more adequate to say that modernity has both secularizing and religionizing tendencies’ (Borgman 2007). Because universities deal with young, modern human populations, they have to deal with that contradictory fact. Many educators and administrators appreciate the religious professionals – ‘chaplains’ – who help them to do so. There are very practical reasons for this. Recent research indicates that religion and spirituality are not only important to contemporary young adults, they may also be related to their well-being and success in higher education. ‘Cultivating the Spirit’ (Astin et al. 2010) is the report of a large-scale longitudinal study of American college and university students (n = 112,000 in 236 institutions in 2003; n = 14,527 in a 2007 follow-up). The study found strong positive relationships between indicators of spiritual growth and several variables important to higher education: measures of academic performance, psychological well-being, leadership development, and satisfaction with the institution. They also found a significant gap in the worldviews of the teaching faculty and the student population seeking to learn from them: faculty scored higher in measures of religiosity, lower in measures of spirituality; student scores were the reverse. The modern distinction between religion and spirituality began to develop about 50 years ago (Zinnbauer et al., 1997). Although spirituality had been an accepted part of each world religion historically, the ‘new spirituality’ of the twentieth century was a problem for religious authorities who sought to maintain control and orthodoxy in a rapidly changing world. As Sandra Schnieders observed:



Religion and Spirituality in Student Life

71

The term ‘spirituality’ often carried pejorative connotations; it came to be associated with questionable enthusiasms or even heretical forms of spiritual practice in contrast to ‘devotion,’ which places a proper emphasis on sobriety and human effort. (Schnieders 1989: 681) A 1997 study of people who described themselves as ‘SBNR’ – ‘spiritual but not religious’ – found that subjects associated ‘religious’ with orthodox beliefs and high participation in institutional worship, and ‘spiritual’ with experimentation, interest in mysticism and negative attitudes towards both clergy and religious organizations (Fuller 2001: 6). Fuller’s major work was followed by many specific studies internationally, some quite well done (Rao et al., 2006; Saucier and Skrzypinska 2006; Chandler 2008); but the research efforts have not summed to a coherent whole, because there was no consistency in defining the terms. The definitions are still not clear, but generally, spirituality is seen as more individual and subjective, religion more relational and institutional (Heelas, 2002). For example, Astin and his colleagues used Likert Scales of frequency and intensity with such operational definitions of ‘being religious’ as the following: I believe in God. I pray. I attend religious services. I follow religious teachings in everyday life. Some of the indicators of ‘being spiritual’ were: I believe in the sacredness of life. I have discussions about the meaning of life with friends. I search for the meaning/purpose of life. Relating the SBNR phenomenon to theories of secularization as either decline or transformation, David Tacey in Australia and Marler and Hadaway in the USA suggest spirituality may be what remains when institutional religion loses influence and experiences lower participation rates (Tacey, 2000, 2003; Marler and Hadaway, 2002). At the 2006 annual Conference of European University chaplains, the National Coordinator of University Chaplains in England and Wales, said:

72

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Spirituality is an elusive term: it is at times vague and imprecise. There are almost as many definitions of it as there are people . . . The challenge for us as chaplains is to be respectful. We recognize that when it comes to spirituality there is no one size that fits all . . . If we are interested in the spiritual health or well-being of ourselves and others we have to take time to listen to the story that individuals use to make sense of where they are at any point of their lives (McCoy, 2006). ‘Listening’ is a verb common not only to counselling and chaplaincy, but also to the ethnographic research methods of cultural anthropology. ‘Listening to The Echo’ is an ongoing national study of young adult spirituality in Canada, begun in 2009 (Sherwood, 2011). The ‘Echo’ referred to in this research is the cohort of young adults born after 1978, the children of the Baby Boomers who were born between 1945 and 1965 – the Echo from the Boom. The culture of this age cohort is distinctly different in family life, school and the work place. Sociologists have needed to coin new terms to describe new social phenomena: the tethered generation, boomerang kids, helicopter parents. Different sociologists in different countries call them the Echo Generation, Emerging Adults, Adultolescents, the Millennial Generation, Generation Y and the Net Generation. They are the first generation to use email, instant messaging and cell phones since childhood and early adolescence. High school teachers have needed to develop new strategies in order to be effective. Universities are adjusting. Marketers are using new techniques to reach them. Employers are just beginning to experience their attitude towards work, and make adjustments. Political parties are wondering how to attract their support, and so are the traditional religious communities of their parents and grandparents. Mainline religious organizations might call them The Lost Generation, because they are not visible in the community life of institutional religion in the ways of their parents and grandparents. Smith and Snell (2009) developed a typology of ‘Emerging Adults’ (aged 18 to 30) in the USA according to their relationship to ‘Religion’ – defined as traditional, institutional expressions of spirituality. Their study was based on a large enough national random sample (n = 3290) to estimate the proportion of the US population that fits into each type, as displayed below with a representative quotation: 1. Committed (traditional) 15% ‘I am really committed.’ 2. Selective 30% ‘I do some of what I can.’



Religion and Spirituality in Student Life

73

3. Spiritually Open

15%  ‘There’s probably something more out there.’ 4. Religiously Indifferent 25% ‘It just doesn’t matter much.’ 5. Religiously Disconnected  5%  ‘I really don’t know what you’re talking about.’ 6. Irreligious 10% ‘Religion just makes no sense.’ (Smith and Snell 2009: 166–179). This research is provocative as much for the questions it raises as for the ones it answers. Are these proportions shifting? If so, in what direction(s)? What would be analogous statistics for other countries? The new Canadian research is coherent with recent findings in Western Europe, the USA and Australia, but has a particularly vivid flavour. It is derived from emails, text messages and GoogleTalk conversations, so the voice of the individual young adult can be heard. Even in the preliminary reports produced in 2011, a number of patterns emerge that are generally consistent with a postmodern worldview. What follows is a list of some of the stronger themes accompanied by quotations that illustrate the attitude or point of view. Each quotation is from a different undergraduate university student aged 18 to 24, collected between 2009 and 2011. Individualism ‘I do believe in a higher power of some sort, but no one can say for sure what it is because for each person it is different. Attempting to label this higher power takes away from its uniqueness to each individual person.’ Independence ‘I’ve always respected my family’s devotion to religion and God, but have no interest in being personally involved.’ A sense of being empowered ‘I believe I am in control of my spirit and destiny.’ A democratic, participatory attitude ‘The beauty of spirituality is that anybody can engage in it, and it can help everybody in their own unique ways.’

74

International Perspectives on Higher Education

The Self as the starting point and focus ‘Ultimately, I believe that everybody needs something to believe in to live a happy life, even if it is a belief in one’s own self.’ A desire for control ‘Religion does not define you. You define it.’ Parents should not determine their children’s religious lives ‘Religion should not be forced on another person, or assumed by parents for their children. It should be entered into freely, based on personal beliefs.’ A negative view of institutional religion . . . ‘Religion is more harmful than helpful.’ . . . at both the macro level (society) ‘Although religion can bring people together, that does not outweigh all of the bad that has come from religion including wars, death, and justification of horrible things.’ . . . and the micro level (the individual) . . . ‘Religion takes away personal choice and the will of a person.’ Cynicism about institutional religion ‘Religion is a business. Parishioners have become commodities that each governing church body is vying for.’ And an association of religion with a pre-modern, pre-scientific worldview ‘I don’t blame ancient humans for believing in God.’ (Sherwood 2011)



Religion and Spirituality in Student Life

75

Some of the young adults in the ‘Listening to The Echo’ project are quite articulate in expressing their preference for being SBNR – ‘spiritual but not religious’. The following communication was from a young woman in her mid-twenties, completing an undergraduate university programme: The idea of spirituality speaks more to me than organized religion does. The idea of believing in something personal, rather than having someone tell me what there is to believe in, makes me more inclined to being spiritual rather than religious. I respect the fact that, for many people, religion is a method of lifting their spirit and bringing a sense of peace. I prefer to bring peace upon myself through personal reflection. Reflecting upon my mistakes and learning from them will make me a stronger, more intuitive person. Self- improvement through personal exploration is what I strive to achieve. Being a spiritual person means that I am aware of my actions and their effect on myself and others. I take responsibility for my happiness; I do not feel the need to attend a church service to put my spirit in a good place. (Sherwood 2011) In fact, most of the statements collected in the Canadian research are as positive about the individual’s spiritual journey as they are negative about institutional religion. They are full of energy and hope, and they speak for a generation – or at least for some members of the Echo generation – who are living spiritual lives, committed to ethical engagement in their society, hoping to make a positive difference in the world. One dissenting theme has emerged from the research, however. Follow-up with university graduates has given voice to people in their late-twenties who completely respect their own decision to opt out of traditional, institutional religious practices, but who now feel the lack of spiritual community: My own personal experience of the divine leaves me in an awkward situation: believing in the existence of some kind of god but not having a group of other people to share that experience with or even discuss it. (Sherwood 2011)

76

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Tacey’s research in Australia is more than ten years old now, but it is still contemporary. ‘Danny’ was 18 in 2001, ‘Matthew’ 22, and ‘Beth’ 19. They are all quoted in Chapter 5 of The Spirituality Revolution. ‘Danny’ sounds like Dietrich Bonhoeffer addressing the age of Christopher Hitchens: I aspire to be a religionless Christian. I want to get back to the essence of Christianity. For me ‘religion’ gets in the way of Christianity. I want us to return to the simple message of the Gospel. Traditional churches are now in a state very similar to the state of religion when Jesus was alive: elitist, devoid of the Holy Spirit, hierarchical. ‘Matthew’ sounds a little like Jesus in conflict with the scribes and Pharisees, but even more like a contemporary version of the sixteenthcentury Protestant Reformers: In this age of ‘new spirituality’ we cast religion aside on the scrap heap as an out-of-date, paternalistic and corrupt system controlled by out-oftouch narrow-minded men. Thank God! Throughout this time of transition, I do not think that many of us have lost our faith in the idea of some kind of God. Rather, I think it is probably more that we have wanted to redefine what God is, and what it means to us as individuals. The task of the new spirituality is to fashion this new image of God. ‘Beth’ addresses the question of God’s identity and how God has been represented by the monotheisms of the twentieth century: God is certainly not dead; people are simply experiencing God in new ways and seeing God differently. Perhaps religion has to be broken apart before spirituality can be born. Perhaps the demise of religion is necessary before we see a new development of spiritual awareness. (Tacey 2003: 75–91) When older audiences hear these statements, some are reminded of the American comic, Lenny Bruce who would get a laugh in the early 1960s when he said: ‘Every day people are straying away from the church and going back to God.’ University chaplains are experienced in listening to young adults, and chaplains know that when students say that they don’t believe in God, this



Religion and Spirituality in Student Life

77

can lead to a rich conversation, learning about the God they don’t believe in. Very often the chaplain does not believe in that God either. In summary then, the spiritual and religious landscape in higher education is a diverse mix of traditional religious beliefs and practices, new religious expression, and eclectic personal spirituality. Much is not known, in part because the change taking place is so dynamic and diverse, in part because new phenomena call for new theoretical thinking and research methods. One thing is known to anyone with frontline experience in student advisory services: students do not leave their spirituality behind when they come to university or college. They do not hang it on a hook at the edge of campus, to be picked up again after class. If they are religious or spiritual people, they seek to express that dimension of their identity on campus. It may not be obvious in the classroom, but it is certainly part of their life in terms of relationships, emotions, hopes, values and personal decisions. They may not be religious in the ways that their parents and grandparents were. They may say quite clearly that they are not religious; but it is equally clear that they wrestle with the timeless existential questions, and they seek help as they do. In this generation, the help they seek is often located in a chaplaincy or multi-faith centre. It is often called ‘The Chaplain’.

Response However, if the spiritual landscape on campus has been changing, so have religious and spiritual advisory services for students. University chaplaincy, as we see it in contemporary developed societies around the world, can trace its history back to the religious origins of western universities. Before the differentiation of academic disciplines and professional functions into the modern forms we see today, religious activity and spiritual care were integral to life in the academy. The first universities were religious institutions themselves. Until perhaps 500 years ago in Western Europe, ‘the door to the church (was) the door to professional life’ (Rashdale 1895: II, 696). It may be said that ‘the clergy profession is the oldest profession’ (Sherwood, 1994). ‘Lawyers, physicians and civil servants were members of the ecclesiastical order who had assumed special functions’ (Carr-Saunders and Wilson 1933: 290). Religious ritual and chaplains were part of university life in the West as the first universities were established and developed.

78

International Perspectives on Higher Education

The word ‘chaplain’ itself comes from the concept of Christian clergy functioning in a special institutional setting, serving a community of people not defined by the local parish or neighbourhood church. The usual etymological explanation refers to St Martin of Tours who offered his cape (‘capella’) to a poorly clothed beggar. According to tradition, a piece of the cape became a relic which travelled around Europe in a tent. That tent became the first ‘chapel’, and the custodians of the relic it contained were called ‘chaplains’. By the fifteenth century in Europe, a chapel was a private sanctuary in an institutional setting or the residence of an élite family. The clergy who served in such places were chaplains. Also by the fifteenth century, the university was one of those places. Who was the first university chaplain, and where? There could be many claims, depending on one’s definition of university; but clearly Cambridge University is one possibility. In 1256, a bequest to the university was given to provide ‘two chaplains for ever ... ’ (Stokes 1906). A lot of cultural baggage comes with this history, such that there are two political concerns in modern life related to the term ‘chaplain’, whether it is used in educational institutions or other settings such as hospitals and the military. First, it is a Christian term, associated with the traditions of the European church when it had power and monopoly. That is problematic for Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Aboriginal and other spiritual counsellors who work with students. On the other hand, many universities have had Jewish ‘chaplains’ for many years. The same is true for Muslim student advisers and members of other faith groups. Different individuals and different universities make various decisions about this. Yale University, for example, avoids the word chaplain, but uses another historically Christian term: Yale Religious Ministries is dedicated to the spiritual, ethical, intellectual, social, and physical welfare of students, faculty, and staff. It is committed to strengthening the University in its task of educating students and expanding the boundaries of human knowledge. It is committed to fostering respect and mutual understanding among people of different faiths and cultures as well as actively promoting dialogue within the University towards that end. (http://chaplain.yale.edu/yrm) The connotations of ‘Ministries’ are gentler, but no less Christian. Nevertheless, the university website identifies 31 religious traditions covered by this reference.



Religion and Spirituality in Student Life

79

Since the late 1980s, the University of Victoria in British Columbia Canada has advertised that the campus community is served by a Multifaith Chaplaincy. The university explains its use of the term with an inclusive definition: All faith groups with the Multifaith Chaplaincy are represented by a Chaplain. A Chaplain is a religious person officially attached to a public institution. The website usually lists about a dozen ‘faith groups’ including Baha’i, Buddhist, Jewish and Muslim. Harvard University is also typical of this increasingly common approach, as explained on its website: Harvard Chaplains is the umbrella organization of over 35 chaplains representing 25 of the world’s traditions, united in their commitment to supporting Harvard students, faculty, and staff. In 2008, when national associations of religious professionals in higher education from more than 20 countries on three continents established a global multi-faith association, they chose to use the word ‘chaplain’. The International Association of Chaplains in Higher Education (IACHE) was established at a meeting in Tampere Finland that year. In January 2011, Oxford University officially appointed its first Hindu Chaplain. In June 2011, one of the authorized Muslim organizations broadcast that there were then more than 30 ‘Muslim chaplains’ on US university and college campuses: http://muslimvoices. org/muslim-chaplains-growing-college-campuses. There are now Wiccan, Humanist and Aboriginal chaplains on various campuses around the world. The word seems to be gaining tenure again, but with a new, multi-faith meaning. The second problem with the word ‘chaplain’ is that it is associated with established religion seeking to maintain the status quo through pastoral care that helps people cope. More than 100 years ago, Max Weber distinguished between Priestly and Prophetic religion, religion that might be ‘chaplain to the status quo’ and religion that might be an ‘agent of change’. Some religious leaders scorn the Priestly expression of religion as a corrupted collaborator in maintaining privilege, poverty and injustice. They see that expression of religion as Marx’s ‘opium of the people’. These religious professionals seek to emphasize the ethical themes of their

80

International Perspectives on Higher Education

traditions, advocating on behalf of justice and social change. They are more likely to be in tension with established institutions than working for them. For example, two of the largest professional associations of campus chaplains in the world are in the USA. The one for professionals who are employed by the colleges and universities they serve uses the term ‘chaplain’ – the National Association of College and University Chaplains (NACUC). The one whose members are not employed by the institution in which they work, but rather by an off-campus faith-based group, is the National Campus Ministry Association (NCMA), and its members avoid the word ‘chaplain’. Similarly, the United Methodist Church, one of the Christian denominations most engaged in campus life in the USA, distinguishes between chaplains and campus ministers on its website: Chaplains generally serve at United Methodist-related educational institutions and receive their pay from the institution. In contrast, campus ministers usually serve schools that are not related to the church. But the lines are often blurred. In Canada, the network of people who are almost universally referred to as ‘the Catholic chaplain’ in universities across the country, identifies itself as ‘Canadian Catholic Campus Ministry’ on a website (http://www.cccm.ca). It is the sort of tension that occurs when a received model adapts to changing circumstances. By the mid-twentieth century, when participation in higher education increased dramatically, the models of chaplaincy were well established: they were specific to a religion or even a specific denomination of a religion, and they were mostly Christian. Two major changes would be needed and introduced in the latter part of the twentieth century: professional standards and multi-faith dynamics. Professional standards were developed by the front-line practitioners themselves as they formed professional associations for mutual support, continuing education and the establishment of ethical codes. Issues of professionalism may be difficult for clergy. They tend to have lower scores of autonomy and they may have lower income than other professional groups with comparable education. In the mid-twentieth century, aware of the ascendancy of other professional occupations and the decline of their own, some clergy groups began to re-professionalize by specializing, establishing ethical codes, adding interdisciplinary knowledge to their expertise and forming new associations (Sherwood 1994).



Religion and Spirituality in Student Life

81

Today there are a number of ecumenical and interfaith professional associations. Larger countries have national associations, some regions have international meetings, and a global interfaith association was established in 2008. The National Association of College and University Chaplains may be the oldest. It was founded in the USA in 1948, about 20 years before the National Campus Ministry Association. According to its constitution, the Purpose of NACUC includes a long list of activities, beginning with: (A) To further the spirit of ecumenicity and understanding among all religious groups as they relate to the university environment. (B) To educate the broader communities of higher education and national religious organizations about the role of religion and spirituality in higher education. NACUC has given leadership to other national associations and the global association as they have emerged. It was a sponsoring association for the first multi-faith global conference in Vancouver, Canada in 2000; and at the second global conference in Brisbane, Australia in 2004, several NACUC members spoke in favour of a possible international, interfaith association. NACUC promoted the third global conference in Tampere, Finland in 2008 as a good opportunity to develop relationships between chaplains internationally and to learn more about chaplaincy practices in other countries. At NACUC’s sixtieth anniversary conference in 2008, members voted to endorse the constitution of the International Association of Chaplains in Higher Education (IACHE). The Australian story is typical of more recent professional efforts. The idea for a national association of religious professionals engaged in student support services in higher education was presented at a national conference held in Hobart in 1986. Up to this time some chaplains had been meeting for annual conferences, but there was no structure for communication between conferences. Initially such meetings were comprised of Catholic chaplains who were priests. In the 1970s, chaplains from other major Christian denominations were included. (Participation did not become multi-faith until 1997.) At the 1986 conference Sr Robyn Johnson proposed that an ecumenical association be established in Australia, and at the 1987 conference in Brisbane the Tertiary Campus Ministry Association was formally constituted. The term ‘Tertiary’ distinguished campus ministry from that in high schools; ‘Campus Ministry’ was preferred to chaplaincy as a more inclusive term. Erich von Dietze, University Chaplain at Curtin

82

International Perspectives on Higher Education

University in Perth, served as TCMA president from 1997 to 2006, giving leadership to the development of the global, multi-faith association that would be established in 2008. The Canadian story is not as positive, but probably more representative of university chaplaincy networks in smaller populations or less developed societies. The Canadian Association of Campus Chaplains developed informally in the 1980s, published a Code of Ethics in 1992 and established a Constitution in 1998. It met formally in Edmonton in 1998, at Phoenix Rising in Vancouver in 2000, and at the University of Western Ontario in 2002. It no longer exists, except as an informal network. Yet it continues to be a reference point. For example, the Code of Ethics can be found on the University of Victoria website, and when the Canadians were left out of the formal ceremony to establish IACHE in Tampere in 2008, some returned home determined to develop an effective support network. One of the results was the Canadian Campus Chaplaincy Centre (www.campuschaplaincy.ca) which has served as a base for research and resources. Perhaps the story of the international conference and global association symbolizes the unfolding story of religion and spirituality in student life today. In 1996, representatives from Canada, the USA, Australia and New Zealand attended an international conference of Christian chaplains in Durham England, where the idea of a multi-faith global conference was developed. With energy from a multi-faith group of Canadian chaplains willing to host the event, Vancouver 2000 was organized. The CEUC seconded Johan Kijne, their Executive Secretary, to the planning committee. The theme was ‘Phoenix Rising’ – a cross-cultural and multi-faith symbol of resurrection, reincarnation, new life and new vitality. It was attended by more than 400 religious professionals from six continents and eight world religions. Those participants realized that they were better prepared to respond to 9/11 the next year and to the new realities of religion in public life because of their experience in Vancouver and the availability of a global network. Most of them were already members of national professional associations, and they saw the value of an international multi-faith organization to help them be more effective in stressful and rapidly changing conditions. When they met again in Brisbane in 2004, they began to develop the International Association of Chaplains in Higher Education. In 2008, a constitution and organization were established at the third global conference in Tampere; and the fourth global conference was set for June 2012 at Yale University on an appropriate theme to resource the front-line professionals: Mosaics in Motion: Spiritual Leadership in a Multi-Faith World.



Religion and Spirituality in Student Life

83

The increasingly international and multi-faith make-up of student populations has put pressure on all student services. International students may be more aggressive in asking for opportunity to practise their religion on campus. Jews, Muslims, Baha’is, Buddhists, Aboriginals and others may feel they need certain accommodations that the university founders did not anticipate. Increasingly, university administrators, thinking in terms of fiscal concerns, recruitment and retention, realize that an effective multifaith chaplaincy serves the university’s mission statement. Some universities have gone so far as to establish a multi-faith centre, either in an existent student services building or as a free-standing building. In Canada, the University of Victoria Interfaith Chapel is a free-standing building, opened in 1986. In Brisbane Australia, Griffith University opened its multi-faith centre in 2002. In the past decade, dozens of US, British and European universities have adapted space or created new space for religious and spiritual groups and activities. Whether or not the space is available, multi-faith programming takes place. Sometimes it is desirable that an event includes the participation of several faith groups; sometimes it is essential. Multi-faith panels are a common approach, addressing such issues as racism, gender roles, ethical issues and public policy issues. These events enrich the intellectual and spiritual life of the campus community. Multi-faith ritual is more difficult, but it can be done, and it may be even more important. For example, after 9/11, many campus communities were able to convene pastoral care services and prayer events on a multi-faith basis. The same needs arose after the tsunamis of December 2004, and local events of violence or tragedy. Multi-faith ritual may need to be invented. When students at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada wanted to commemorate the victims of 9/11 on the first anniversary, they asked their chaplain to develop an appropriate and inclusive memorial service. Secular student leaders and nine world religions were represented in the planning and the service, which took place in a lounge at the top of the only high-rise building on campus. The religious groups were allotted about five minutes each to read scripture or recite from sacred tradition, and pray. If the language was Hebrew, Arabic, Sanskrit or Cree, the speaker would translate or explain. Students said afterwards that they had expected to feel like spectators during most of the ceremony, but many were surprised to realize how affected they were and how much their own spirituality was expressed during the leadership by various religious groups. Some of the students most touched by the ritual and most appreciative identified themselves as ‘not religious’.

84

International Perspectives on Higher Education

After the speakers had taken their turns, the crowd of students joined in a circle, holding hands to symbolize hope for the oneness of humanity and to remember that people holding hands cannot point fingers or throw things at each other. Then, silently they walked down 44 flights of stairs, remembering the victims of the two New York towers, remembering too that some of the victims had been rescue workers on their way up. University students feel fragile under the stress of economic, academic and time pressure. They feel especially vulnerable at the beginning of a new year and during exams. The fact that 9/11 occurred during the first week of classes increased the trauma for students. Some were just learning their new roommate’s name, just meeting their professors and classmates for the first time. They had left a familiar support system, and not yet established the new one. Ritual can help a human group deal with crisis. But in the modern student population, the ritual needs to be inclusive of diverse spirituality ... and possibly invented.

Conclusion The first few years after secondary school are a critical period of risk and decision-making for young adults in modern society. They choose their careers, their lifestyles, their life partners perhaps, and their styles of citizenship in society. It is a time of vocational discernment in the broadest sense, not only in terms of jobs and careers. It is a time of identity discernment. On many campuses, students use the chaplaincy as a safe place to do that discernment in conversation with others as they reflect on the curriculum, get to know themselves better, develop their own ethical identities and discuss public issues. They may become educators, civil servants, scientists, entrepreneurs, doctors, social workers, politicians, managers, architects, engineers or anything. But for the large population of students who participate in chaplaincy programmes, hang out in a multi-faith centre or engage religious and spiritual advisers in conversation, their vocational decisions are based in part on religious values or a spiritual identity. For most of its centuries-old history, the university has been a place of community, spirituality and values. Contemporary conditions can make this difficult if not impossible. There isn’t enough space at most universities and colleges for adequate common rooms; the students commute to class and rush away to their part-time jobs; traditional religious institutions struggle in post-modern culture; materialism, pragmatism and



Religion and Spirituality in Student Life

85

harsh economic realities erode ethical thinking. But on many campuses, chaplaincies and multi-faith centres function to support the humanity of the campus population, to build community, nurture and express spirituality, and articulate ethical values. Wherever a university or college has such a resource, it is better able to maintain its own best tradition and integrity.

References Astin, Alexander W., Astin, H. S. and Lindholm, J. A. (2010) Cultivating the Spirit San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons. Available on http://spirituality.ucla.edu/ Berger, Peter L. (1999) The Desecularization of the World Grand Rapids Michigan: Eerdmans Borgman, Erik (2007) ‘The Art of Chaplaincy in a Secular and Pluralistic Context’ Conference of European University Chaplains. Available on http://www.ceuc. org/papers-new.htm Carr-Saunders, A. M. and Wilson, P. A. (1933) The Professions Oxford: Clarendon Chandler, Siobhan (2008) ‘The social ethic of religiously unaffiliated spirituality’ Social Compass 2 (2) 240–56 Fuller, Robert (2001) Spiritual, But Not Religious Oxford: Oxford University Press Heelas, Paul (2002) ‘The spiritual revolution: from “religion” to “spirituality”’ in Woodhead, L. and Fletcher, K. et al. Religion in the Modern World Routledge, London pp. 357–77 Marler, P. L. and Hadaway, C. K. (2002) ‘Being “religious” or being “spiritual” in America: a zero-sum proposition?’ Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 41 (2) 289–300 McCoy, Chris (2006) ‘Spirituality and Student Life in an Urban Atmosphere’ Conference of European University Chaplains (CEUC). Available on http:// www.ceuc.org/papers-new.htm Rashdale, H. (1895) The Medieval Universities (3 vols) Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rao, K., Ball, D. and Hampton, R. (2006) ‘Spiritual but not religious: insights from an online panel’ University of Nebraska at Lincoln. Available on http:// www.kumarrao.net/wp/wpcontent/uploads/2010/06/REFID8_MAPOR_06_ PAPER_Final.pdf Saucier, Gerard and Skrzypinska, Katarzyna (2006) ‘Spiritual but not religious?’ Journal of Personality 74 (5) 1257–92 Schnieders, Sandra (1989) ‘Spirituality in the Academy,’ Theological Studies 50 (2) 676–97 Sherwood, Tom (1994) ‘Reprofessionalization among Canadian clergy’ ProQuest document ID 741 822 881, ISBN 9780315930049 Publisher Number AAT NN 93004 —(2011) ‘Listening to The Echo’. Available on http://campuschaplaincy.ca/ category/listening-to-the-echo Smith, Christian and Patricia Snell (2009) Souls in Transition: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of Emerging Adults Oxford: Oxford University Press

86

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Stendahl, Krister (1963) ‘Religion in the University’ Daedalus 92 (3) 521–8 MIT Press Stokes, H. P. (1906) ‘The Chaplains and the Chapel of the University of Cambridge (1256–1568)’ Cambridge Antiquarian Society. Available on http://www.archive. org/stream/chaplainschapelo00stokrich/chaplainschapelo00stokrich_djvu.txt Tacey, David (2000) ReEnchantment – The New Australian Spirituality Sydney: HarperCollins —(2003) The Spirituality Revolution Sydney: HarperCollins Zinnbauer, B. J., Pargement, K. I. et al. (1997) ‘Religion and spirituality: unfuzzying the fuzzy’ Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 36(4) 549–64

Part 2

Leadership and Management

Chapter 4

Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University: Hard Choices and Effective Management Muriel Robinson

Introduction This chapter explores the issues facing senior managers in higher education at a time when public spending cuts and the wider economic crisis have brought unprecedented pressures to bear on a still evolving English mass higher education system. The chapter revisits Watson’s taxonomy of ‘wicked issues’ (2000a) some ten years after this was developed, and argues that as UK higher education has changed, a new category of issues even more resistant to lasting solutions has emerged. These issues are explored in abstract terms but also given life through examples drawn from the immediate reality of a small independent Anglican university college in England. The chapter then explores what kind of leadership structures and processes might be used to try to manage such issues, starting from the position of an ethically-based institutional vision and the ensuing ambition for a transparent and just model of organizational leadership. This is an unfolding story with no immediate conclusion and as a result, the chapter offers more questions than certainties.

Background Older readers may remember the TV show M*A*S*H. Set in an American mobile army hospital, this darkly comic series explored the challenges of medical and surgical care for the wounded during the Korean War. For many of us it was our first encounter with the notion of triage – sorting the minor injuries from the serious, the treatable from the hopeless case. Buffeted by the fortunes of war, the unit moved around as the front line of operations moved and adjusted its procedures in line with the dictats of the army. Staffed largely by surgeons who in peacetime were civilians, the

90

International Perspectives on Higher Education

struggle between everyday common sense and military life caused constant tensions but the core business of the hospital remained the same: to treat the wounded in almost overwhelmingly difficult circumstances. This seems a good analogy for English higher education at the present time. Although we admit students rather than casualties of war, we are similarly buffeted by an external environment which appears hostile and illogical and which we are largely powerless to influence to any great degree. Our controlling funders have different agendas from us and a different way of being. Those of us in leadership positions, like Colonel Potter in the TV series, struggle to protect our expert academics from the demands of an uncomprehending government and to square the circle of externally-imposed initiatives and the well-being of our students. Triage has become a management tool – we sort the trivial from the significant, the impossible tasks from those that need more time but are achievable. We try to do it all with diminishing resources, as budget decisions are taken based on political motivations which seem to fly in the face of common sense as we see it. This may be an extreme and unfair analogy but it certainly has resonance. As someone who has worked in higher education for over 25 years, who has now been in a senior leadership position in English higher education for 11 years, and who has been the leader of an institution for eight, I have experienced the financial struggles of the late 1980s and 1990s, the growth created by the 50 per cent participation target and now the retrenchment of the latest government cuts, with more to come. Yet the core activity of every higher education institution (HEI) remains the same – learning, teaching and research, leading to the furtherance of knowledge and a well-educated population. Just as Colonel Potter tried to maintain the ability of his surgical team to save lives despite fluctuations in the supply of essential medications and equipment, and amid constant uncertainty about location and peaks and troughs of casualty intakes, so I and my fellow heads of institutions attempt to protect the quality of learning and teaching as we react to successive and unpredictable changes of policy and the funding implications that accompany these changes. It is of course true that no one will die as a result of these changes, but neither are we laughing very much. This chapter explores what it means to be a leader in higher education during such a time of change, identifying what seem to be the current ‘wicked issues’ and possible solutions. In doing so, I build on David Watson’s use of Rittel and Webber’s description of social policy issues as ‘wicked’ problems (Rittel and Webber, 1973, cited in Watson, 2000a: 5)



Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University

91

to identify a taxonomy of wicked issues prevalent in higher education: ‘however rational and well-understood a college or university strategy may be, this does not prevent the emergence, and the intransigence of certain issues which it cannot apparently resolve’ (Watson 200a: 5). This chapter uses an autoethnographic approach, with myself as author engaging in participant observation as I draw on my own recent experiences to consider what kinds of structures, approaches and personal characteristics are most appropriate in addressing the wicked issues of today. I cannot pretend to any scholarly expertise in this field; my own subject discipline is, like that of many Vice Chancellors and Principals, completely unrelated to my current role except insofar as it gives me an understanding of the academic endeavour of our staff and students. Anything I have learned about leadership has come from reading; from discussion with my peers; from working with colleagues from the Leadership Foundation and similar bodies; and from direct experience as the leader of a small, independent Anglican university college for the past eight years.

Just how challenging are these times we are in? One indicator of the degree of challenge in 2011 is that the following section, originally drafted in August 2010, has had to be completely rewritten to reflect major changes in policy introduced to English higher education since then. Following a General Election in May 2010 and the formation of the so-called ‘Condemnation’ Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition, existing funding models are being replaced by one reflecting the somewhat conflicting policy stances of these two parties. From the Conservatives comes an emphasis on freeing up the market and deregulating, with a view that central ‘interference’ by government is wrong; from the Liberal Democrats, a renewed emphasis on social inclusion. Under the new arrangements, due to take effect from August 2012, the amount of direct state funding into HEIs will be dramatically reduced. Undergraduate study in the arts, humanities and social sciences will no longer be subsidised by state funds paid directly to institutions by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), and even other areas of study are likely to have far less money from this source. Instead, the money will be diverted to a vastly increased loans system allowing students to borrow the whole cost of their degree (up to £9,000 per annum in the academic year 2012–13).

92

International Perspectives on Higher Education

To counterbalance the potential market economy in undergraduate provision, certain controls remain, in particular a student number control preventing institutional expansion. Additionally, any institution wanting to charge between £6,000 and £9,000 must submit an Access Agreement detailing the funding and organization of activities designed to attract, recruit and retain students from under-represented groups. A National Scholarship Programme will offer limited additional bursaries and fee waivers to a very small number of students, match-funded by government and institutions. In our case, with a student body of some 2,000, and a first year intake of around 600, we will have 17 government-funded grants of £3,000 each which we must either match by giving the 17 another £3,000 in, for example, fee waivers or accommodation, or offer another 17 grants of £3,000 each. Alongside planning for these major changes, English HEIs faced in-year cuts for 2010–11 and more cuts for 2011–12, not just in the teaching grant but also in previously allocated research funding. Costs have risen as inflation holds at around 4 per cent, VAT has been increased and there are increases likely for employers and employees related to the pension schemes in higher education, coupled with a major review of public sector pensions which could mean academic staff working up to six years longer to receive a pension without actuarial reduction. Employer–employee relations are under a resulting strain as pay rises are significantly below inflation and retirement options potentially worsened. If there have been more challenging times to be a leader in English higher education, it is hard to imagine when. Years ago, when I was a relatively inexperienced programme leader, a colleague and I went on a course entitled ‘Dealing with difficult situations’. We were both wrestling with complex issues around staffing, recruitment, faculty versus institutional policy – the usual array of challenges for a middle manager in UK higher education in the 1990s. We were asked to arrive with a difficult situation that we were currently seeking to address, to share with the group as part of the course. However, when we did so, it quickly became apparent that the course providers were in no way ready for the problems we brought – they were considerably more difficult than had been anticipated. Over the past year, as the situation in English higher education has become more and more challenging, I feel as though I am beginning to understand how those course providers felt as we explained the complexities we were struggling with; there are times when it just feels too difficult. ‘Wicked issues’ (Watson 2000a) seem increasingly to be the order of the day and to be getting wickeder by the week.



Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University

93

Watson’s taxonomy revisited Watson (2000a) set out his taxonomy of wicked issues using three main categories. In the first came issues which he saw as affecting ‘all large and complex employers in the late twentieth century’ (2000a: 2). These included parking, smoking and security, and their ‘wickedness’ remains challenging today. For example, we still wrestle with the potential impact on local residents of introducing parking charges for staff or students, and over the best way to balance environmental concerns about over-use of the combustion engine with the challenges of a rural location with poor public transport links. Watson’s second category, the issues shared with the wider public sector, also still resonates. Here he explores issues around what was then seen as the new managerialism in the university sector. Watson cites such examples as workplace stress and league tables as characteristic ‘wicked’ issues in this category and undoubtedly all this still occupies more than its proportionate share of the average Vice Chancellor’s time. Some of my discussion below will recast these issues as current tensions which may well affect a wider group of employers within the public sector. Finally, Watson identifies a set of issues which he sees as particular to higher education and which come in part from the context of working with young adults just finding their feet as independent members of society. These for him include what we might characterize as ‘town and gown’ tensions around noise and lifestyle but also the increasing pressure on students psychologically in a new model of higher education where working alongside study has become the norm. At the end of the twentieth century, the funding pressures on students were very different from those of previous generations (where grants were the order of the day and fees were paid by local authorities). The current and future arrangements in England where payment of fees is deferred until graduates are working had not yet been introduced, but certainly such pressures as were apparent in the late 1990s have more in common with those we face today than with the model experienced by my generation. That these were indeed intransigent and complex matters can be demonstrated by the impact that some of the solutions adopted then are now having. For example, where we attempted to accommodate both the pressures on group size caused by expansion and student reluctance to attend for more than the minimum hours a week by such strategies as flexible timetabling and fewer contact weeks and hours, we now see our solutions criticized by current cohorts of students as a perceived lack of

94

International Perspectives on Higher Education

value for money. In my own institution in the early years of this century, I chaired debates at Academic Board about the unfair load which would be put on certain undergraduates should contact time be standardized across the institution – how could those studying English possibly be expected to cope with as much as 12 hours of taught time each week? Now, just eight years later, these have been replaced by clamours for more teaching from students who see direct contact with tutors as a measure of value for money. Watson’s taxonomy is, then, still relevant today, and many of the specific issues he explored at the turn of the century have indeed proved intractable, but I would argue that a new order of even ‘wickeder’ issues, set out below, have emerged since then. My list is not exhaustive, but reflects current tensions within the English higher education system affecting the daily life of my own institution and higher education more generally. Given that by definition such issues are irresolvable, this chapter does not set out to offer a toolkit of easy solutions. Rather, it is an attempt to map the new territory in the abstract and through illustration from my own context, before considering the necessary and desirable characteristics of leaders and leadership structures in such a context.

Wicked issues for 2011 and beyond My list (as of 2011) currently reads as follows: 1 The tension that arises when what we believe to be right and good with regard to the organization and provision of higher education is starkly at odds with government policy. 2 The need to continue to seek improvement while spending less. 3 The related need to maintain the psychological contract with staff in the context of sector-wide restructuring and redundancy, while at the same time maintaining student confidence and enthusiasm in a world where expectations may exceed realistic possibility and complaints become increasingly common and pernicious. 4 The pull between a sector and regulatory expectation of long-term planning on a three- or five-year cycle and the need to respond to circumstances as they arise. I would argue that these could in some ways be seen as sitting across Watson’s categories and possibly also creating a fourth, in that they are peculiar to organizations at any moment of great external uncertainty and



Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University

95

change. Although the exemplifications here relate to the current situation in England, the principles can clearly be seen as having an international dimension; similarly, although the exemplifications are within higher education it is not impossible to see how such pressures could also apply to other complex organizations within and beyond the public sector. Just as with my use of the analogy to M*A*S*H, we can use this particular example of higher education in England in 2011 to ask wider questions about how to lead organizations through such times. As I explore my set of wicked issues in more depth and describe what they look like in our particular context, I would emphasize that if these are genuinely wicked, there are no straightforward strategies for resolution that can be described. What we have done so far is therefore not the point of each example; these following sections typically end with questions rather than with tidy outcomes or claims as to models for best practice. Our broad strategies as a senior leadership team are addressed later in an attempt to map the characteristic behaviours we are trying to develop in the light of what we understand about successful leadership, but may well prove to need adaptation and revision as the situation unfolds. Wicked issue 1: values, ethos and the outside world I referred earlier to the position of the head of institution as sitting between the university staff and the outside world, just as Colonel Potter attempted to sit between the realities of army systems and regulations and the surgeons who had no truck with such systems but were driven primarily by the need to save lives. Of course academic staff also have other networks and contacts, but the mediating role of the head of institution is particularly significant here in times when the outside world may be going in directions that are at odds with the perceived institutional understanding. The current English situation is an excellent example of what must be one of the most challenging situations for any Vice Chancellor or Principal to manage. Faced with a situation where the funding we have relied upon from the government via HEFCE is being at best drastically reduced and at worst completely removed, and required to lead a process of setting a fee under the new regulations, heads of institution have to act to achieve continued financial stability even where they may feel extremely uncomfortable with the model they will have to espouse. In my own institution, the majority view is that the impending ideological changes in higher education are not right or good; this majority view is

96

International Perspectives on Higher Education

shared by the Senior Leadership Team and by many of our governors. We believe these changes seriously limit the government’s ability to intervene in higher education to ensure it operates as a common social good which benefits all of society and not just those who benefit personally from an undergraduate experience. I say this so clearly not to provoke debate on the rights and wrongs of the decision but to raise the issue of leadership in a situation where the organization has a very stark choice between going against its ethos and values to continue its existence or holding to a position that renders its continuance impossible. How does the head of such an organization both recognize and affirm the views of the internal community and make a business case for operating in the new world? In practical terms, what we have had to do is to move from a position where we worked to influence policy to one where we had to admit that we had lost that argument but where we still wanted to be in the game of higher education. We have had to decide upon a strategy for setting fees in a context where any discussion with other institutions is perceived as a potentially illegal cartel with regard to competition legislation. The context is also one of an absence of hard market information as to what the next generation of students will do in the face of continued press comment, largely ill-informed, which exaggerates the burden on graduates and continues to argue for an imaginary burden on parents. Typical of press comment is the article in The Independent, 14 June 2011 in which the paper’s education editor claims: Middle-income families will shun universities for their children once fees rise to up to £9,000 a year, according to research published today. A study of more than 500 middle-income parents revealed the majority – 51 per cent – said they could no longer afford to send their child to university. (Garner 2011) Nowhere in the article is it made clear that this is a groundless fear, since just as now no payments are needed to study nor any parental guarantee required, with loans repayments taken at a manageable level from wages. We have had to model scenarios based on the information available, consult students and prospective students as to what they perceive as worthwhile aspects of higher education, and persuade our governors of the appropriateness of our actions, all within a very short time frame. Even after working through this situation and arriving at a fee, the tension remains. We are still adjusting to a world where we are having to allow our



Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University

97

belief in the greater good of our remaining in the higher education arena to override our belief that the new system is inherently wrong. We also have to live with at least a temporary uncertainty as to whether we have made the right decision in the light of the announcements of others. Our desire to manage some of the tensions above has led to our arguing for a fee which is below the market maximum and where the predominant factor has been how much money we believe we need to offer a continuing good quality of experience rather than any view as to how our brand might be affected by the price we charge. As we see where others have set their own fees, will we feel we should have taken more account of market position? Will our arguments to students that price should not be a marker of quality be persuasive in an environment where the cost of a graduate’s monthly repayments is not differentiated by the size of the debt but by their salary? Wicked issue 2: doing better while spending less The need to continue to improve while seeing a diminishing income is a new experience for just about every current leader of an English HEI. The proposed new system for 2012, and the more immediate grant funding cuts of the past couple of years, follow a decade or more of stable or increasing resource across the sector. While individual institutions may have had crises of funding around falling demand or poor completion rates, such changes have tended to be localized into particular disciplines or programmes rather than institution-wide, with a few well-documented exceptions. Undoubtedly this challenge will be what has led some institutions to set fees at the top end of the new maximum, since if their recruitment holds up and they are able to attract sufficient students who pay the maximum and control the numbers attracting fee waivers, their income could increase. However, the obvious risk is that media speculation about a collapse in middle-class assumptions that university is a rite of passage may come true and income could decrease despite a high fee level. Institutions that have set the maximum from motives such as enabling significant work in widening participation and generous fee waivers run the risk of being seen as more generously funded than now when the reality may be very different. There is, for all of us, a communication challenge in helping students recognize that although the increase in fees is on an unprecedented scale, the increase is largely to replace other income from the Funding Council rather than genuine new money. Whatever the reason for budget reductions, and whether these are temporary and will be alleviated by new fee decisions or longer-lasting,

98

International Perspectives on Higher Education

almost all English HEIs are currently having to reduce costs and bring in budgets which show a tighter control on revenue in particular. At the same time, they are having to ensure that the offer to students looks at least as good and respond to increasingly challenging responses to the National Student Survey and internal equivalents which demand improvements. Wicked issue 3: maintaining morale when expectations may exceed possibility Much is made these days of what we have come to know as the psychological contract – the relationship between staff and students of an HEI which exists in addition to the formal contracts of work and study. The way of being in English higher education has created a particular psychological contract which encourages staff and students to engage positively with the organization even where the formal contractual situation is perceived as less than ideal. This set of tacit relationships and behaviours is difficult to articulate, but elements of this for my own institution might include the ways in which senior staff interact with colleagues at all levels, the generosity of spirit by which staff give time beyond any contractual obligations to support students or colleagues in difficulties, and the mutual respect shown by academic and professional support staff for each others’ competences. This psychological contract with staff and students has a significant role to play in maintaining the smooth running of any HEI, but is increasingly under threat as cuts threaten redundancies and reduce student opportunities, and as students are increasingly having to take on the costs of their education. How do higher education institutions address the increased need to maintain morale to face up to risk at a time when the psychological contract established with staff has been destabilized? In particular, how do we maintain and extend our commitments to being fair employers at a time when we may be making staff redundant? Any casual reader of the British press, in particular of the Times Higher Education, will know that almost every university has undergone or is undergoing restructuring with a view to reducing the workforce, and our institutional situation is no exception. In our case, we have chosen to restructure not through a programme of enhanced voluntary redundancies but through a more root and branch reconsideration of our structures and their fitness for purpose in the new era. Having committed ourselves to ensuring that the student experience would be central in this process, we have had to make hard decisions around senior and middle leadership



Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University

99

posts which have led to a complete change of senior leadership structures and personnel over the course of 18 months (with the exception of myself as head of institution), followed by internal restructuring in the new areas of activity and a cross-institution series of consultations and compulsory redundancies. In this second wave, overall numbers are still small, with just under 30 posts disappearing and nearly 20 new ones replacing them, and the actual numbers of staff leaving will be in single figures or just over, but for an organization that has seen staffing grow consistently for at least ten years and that has had a settled leadership structure for a similar period, this is a major disruption to the established order and so seeks to undermine the psychological contract quite significantly. At the same time, the psychological contract with students (and their parents and families) is particularly at risk in the new arrangements and yet is crucial for the survival of the organization. As students begin to be the principal funders of our undergraduate provision, it seems likely that they will expect significantly more from us both with regard to learning and teaching and with regard to professional support services, including accommodation, catering and entertainment. There is a real danger that if we cannot be clear with students that this new system is not significantly increasing our income as opposed to changing its source, expectations will outstrip possible satisfaction by some considerable amount. It is already the case that under the current system, which sees students paying around 40 per cent of the cost of their education through fees, we have seen a steady increase in student complaints. The Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA), which is the place of last resort for students when internal complaints procedures are exhausted, has reported annually on its increasing caseload (1,341 complaints in 2010, an increase of 33 per cent on the previous year, (OIA Annual Report 2010)). Even though 53 per cent of the complaints which get that far are found not to be justified, each complaint risks damaging the psychological contract and potentially the reputation of the institution. Increasingly we find that challenges by students start early (with growing numbers complaining if they are unsuccessful at application) and come directly to the head of the institution. In any institution of the size of even a small HEI, there are bound to be staff and student grumbles; what makes this challenge a wicked one is that many of these grumbles and formal complaints come from mutually exclusive aspirations. To take a very trivial example, staff at our institution have until now been provided with free tea and coffee through the staff common room. This is not perceived as a benefit but as a right, to be asserted strongly should any failure of supply occur, but in a climate where

100

International Perspectives on Higher Education

funding comes directly from students it is unlikely that any student would see it as appropriate that relatively well-paid staff get free tea and coffee while students have to pay for their refreshments. However we resolve this issue, it serves as a small but concrete reminder of Watson’s point that ‘it is of the nature of wicked issues that often one good has to be allowed to trump another’ (Watson 2000a: 19). If even such a small example can lead to an impact either on staff morale or on student satisfaction, how do institutional leadership teams go about maintaining a sufficient ‘quantum of happiness’ (Watson 2009: 135) within both staff and student bodies at a time of increased expectation and reduced income? Wicked issue 4: strategic plan or happenstance? It is established practice in English HEIs to have a corporate strategic plan, revised every three or five years and then seen as the largely immutable guide to development over the relevant period (see Watson 2000b for a full exploration of strategic planning and management in higher education). These plans have had to be submitted to HEFCE and annual statements have to be provided showing how far ambitions have been achieved. Usually a cascade of internal faculty and department plans rolls out from the central strategy as well as a raft of accompanying policies and strategies around such issues as widening participation or learning and teaching. In the past much collective endeavour has gone into the production of glossy documents, reified in paper at the moment of submission. We had learned to believe that the existence of the plan was a fundamental requirement and that whether we had a collaborative and distributed model for setting the direction or a model where the vice chancellor’s office made the decisions, the plan itself was a sine qua non. The last 18 months or so have raised serious questions about such an approach. For any university which wrote its strategic plan in the last days of the last government, planning would be predicated on a worldview which no longer holds good. Yet an approach that only looks 12 months ahead can be equally problematic in ensuring a clear sense of direction and continuity, and the work entailed in producing a plan can be a huge burden which it makes no sense to undertake annually. Additionally, all those of us who have lived through the past decade have become aware that even where a period of relative political stability has coincided with a particular three-year plan, life is not as tidy as the plan might anticipate. What can be most helpfully thought of as happenstance also needs to be taken into



Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University

101

account; in other words, things happen and opportunities arise that we have not factored in. Part of the challenge for any institutional leadership team, therefore, is how to plan appropriately but to leave space for the opportunities (and unexpected difficulties) that can arise. Traditional approaches to risk management, with their carefully constructed tables of risk, mitigation strategies and apparently scientific scoring systems are only useful when we can take control of at least the majority of risks identified. Once more of the major risks come from factors outside our control than from those within it, then we need a new approach. Our own corporate plan for 2007–10 included a final section setting out our ambitions for the following ten years, in line with the then vogue for future-gazing and scenario planning. When we began the revision process, we quickly realized that ambitions sketched out in 2006 were inappropriate in 2009, and as we undertook the task of writing a new plan over the academic year 2009–10 we were aware that a plan fixed at a particular moment in time was no longer going to be of much use. Similarly, our extensive risk table, running at one point to some 50 risks, was increasingly of limited use, as evidenced by the reluctance of key staff to spend time updating it to report to the Audit Committee each term. Yet in such uncertain waters to be without any plan would be a much higher risk than to have one which proved inappropriate. Our decision was to go for a slimmed down, high level plan, with no hard copy and a ‘continual refresh’ online version, and a similarly slimmed down risk table concentrating much more on the major (largely externally controlled) risks and the intelligence-gathering necessary to mitigate these as far as possible, but others have responded by producing much lengthier plans. How do we balance the need for a cohesive and thought-through strategy for the institution, with a vision of what we are and can become, with a need to be reflexive and flexible enough to seize new opportunities? How do we maintain a pro-active approach to setting the institutional direction and yet be ready to find a new route to our goal when circumstances change?

So what do we do as leaders, and what do we need to be like? So far I have concentrated on setting out the dilemmas which face leaders in English higher education. Although, as I have said, the ways in which my own organization has addressed these is not in any way a template for successful resolution of any of them, we do need to ask the question as to what we know about what has until now made for good leadership within and beyond the higher education sector.

102

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Both the wider literature on leadership and that on leadership for higher education includes extensive discussion of what makes a good leader, though of course, this may not hold good in changing times. One of the most thorough examinations of the literature within higher education, and one quoted widely by others, is Bryman’s (2007) comprehensive review of effective leadership which sets out a tentative list of characteristics including: providing direction and creating structure; fostering a supportive and collaborative environment; facilitating participation in decision-making; and providing communication about developments (Bryman 2007: 169). Similarly rigorous in its approach is the work of Jim Collins and his research team, perhaps most notably within Good to Great (Collins 2001), a study of the characteristics which enabled some companies to go from a respectable to outstanding performance, and How the Mighty Fall (Collins 2009) exploring why in times of pressure some previously great companies fail. By definition the issues identified in this chapter, if genuinely wicked, have no right answers or easy resolutions, but still as leaders we have to act rather than leaving these matters in the ‘too difficult’ file. Here I offer three possible ways in which Collins’ findings can help us achieve the ‘reflective pragmatist’ approach for which Watson argues when dealing with wicked issues (Watson 2000a: 17), illustrated with examples from our own leadership approach.

The right people in the right seats on the bus Perhaps one of the most powerful lessons I have learned from Collins is the importance of having the right people in the right configuration – as Collins puts it, in the right seats on the bus. Although Collins also points to the danger of over-reliance on restructuring as an end in itself and ‘obsessive reorganizations’ (Collins 2009: 81), there is no doubt in my mind that this concept is key. We do also need to think about where the bus is going and how it will get there, but the Collins research showed that those companies who made the leap to great did so after they sorted out the people questions: They said, in essence ‘Look, I don’t really know where we should take this bus. But I know this much: if we get the right people on the bus, the right people in the right seats, and the wrong people out of the



Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University

103

bus, then we’ll figure out how to take it someplace great.’ (Collins, 2001: 41) Such an approach feels counter-intuitive, as Collins acknowledges, and for years we resisted this approach. After all, how can we know what are the right seats if we don’t know where we are going? Yet now, having redefined the seats and filled them with good people with the right capabilities, we feel better placed to cope with the uncertainty of direction created by the external world and to shift our course as necessary.

Communication, communication, communication Another message which we have taken from Collins is the need to be completely honest with ourselves and others about the situation: as Collins puts it, to ‘confront the brutal facts’ (2001: 65). For us this has involved not just telling people what we think they need to hear but listening and engaging in discussion to create ‘a climate where the truth is told’ (2001: 73) by using questions to gain understanding and by engaging in ‘dialogue and debate, not coercion’ (2001: 75). What has that meant in practice as we have addressed the wicked issues above? Our approach to fee setting provides an example of this approach. First, to ensure complete honesty with staff, students, governors and the wider community about our philosophical stance, we explicitly shared our view with staff, students, governors and our local MP, and supported students in their own protests. We knew we needed to make the conversation about how to move forward one which involved as many players as possible. So our decision as to what fees to charge was informed by widespread consultation with students as to what they value about their experience and about their perceptions of what might constitute fairness, to help shape decisions about what needed to continue, grow or diminish. Conversations with staff asked what they thought students and their parents would see as appropriate use of the funding to come from fees. We asked people to examine our current practices to see what should continue and what might seem less justifiable in the new dispensation. We believe that such an approach does not abrogate responsibility for action but enables action to be rooted in a shared understanding of the difficulties and to be open to challenge as complex and ‘wicked’ situations change.

104

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Identifying and managing risk In his study of the companies that failed, Collins identified one key indicator of trouble as being the denial of risk. He suggests that there are just three simple questions to be used when addressing risk: 1 What’s the upside, if events turn out well? 2 What’s the downside, if events go very badly? 3 Can you live with the downside? Truly? (Collins 2009: 74) In our consideration of the fee to set, these questions framed the debate. Our financial modelling and scenario analysis drew on current costs and income and built in worst-case assumptions around any residual government funding and such matters as salary and pension increases. We were able to manipulate these assumptions to test the model to destruction – at what point would the downside become terminal? – but also to check that the best outcomes were ones which also sat well with our wish to develop an equitable and affordable solution for our students. Such modelling was only possible because we had people in the team with the capability to face the facts and ask the unpalatable questions, and with the courage to recognize that the worst that could happen was potentially very bad indeed.

Facing the future For the medics in M*A*S*H, there was ultimately a resolution of sorts as the Korean War came to an end and they went their separate ways to very different peacetime lives. English higher education at the time of writing offers no such resolution but an ongoing uncertainty (and as I finish this in June 2011, two more government consultation papers have emerged, both with yet more uncertainties). Our wicked issues are with us for the foreseeable future and will no doubt be joined by new ones. Perhaps all that we can ask of ourselves as leaders is that we remain aware of the inevitability of irresolvable challenges and that we also remain aware that whatever provisional answers we come up with can at best be good enough for the time being rather than perfect and permanent solutions.



Leadership in the Twenty-first Century University

105

References Bryman, A. (2007) Effective Leadership in Higher Education: Summary of Findings London; Leadership Foundation Collins, J. (2001) Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap . . . and Others Don’t London: Random House —*(2006) Good to Great and the Social Sectors London: Random House —(2009) How the Mighty Fall and Why Some Companies Never Give In London: Random House *Fielden, J. (2011) Leadership and Management of International Partnerships: Final Report London: Leadership Foundation Garner, R. (2011) “Middle-income families will ‘shun universities’” Independent article accessed at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/educationnews/middleincome-families-will-shun-universities-2297092.html and appeared in the print edition on 14 June 2011 Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (2011) Annual Report 2010: Delivery, Growth, Modernisation, Change Reading: OIA and available at www. oiahe.org.uk Rittel, H. and Webber, M. (1973) ‘Dilemmas in a general theory of planning’ Policy Scienbces vol 4 pp. 155–69 Watson, D. (2000a) ‘Managing in Higher Education: the ‘Wicked Issues’ in Higher Education Quarterly 54 (1) 5–21 —(2000b) Managing Strategy Buckingham: Open University Press —(2009) The Question of Morale: Searching for Happiness in University Life Maidenhead: Open University Press

Notes Books marked * are not referenced directly but may be of interest to readers wanting to take this matter further. The TV series M*A*S*H was developed by Larry Gelbart from the original 1968 novel by Richard Hooker and the 1970 feature film directed by Robert Altman. The TV show ran for eleven seasons between 1972 and 1983. Available at http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M*A*S*H_(TV_series). Times Higher Education is a British weekly magazine for higher education.

Chapter 5

Internationalization and Globalization: Implications for Higher Education Learning and Teaching Terfot A. Ngwana and Fengshu Liu

Introduction In the Introduction, Kerry noted the controversy associated with the concepts of globalization and internationalization held by some academics in universities. In this chapter we explore the values embedded in the concepts of internationalism and globalization and argue that there are broad ramifications which are worth critical rethinking when these concepts are applied to learning and teaching at institutional and programme levels in higher education. Presenting a robust reflection upon the theories of internationalism and globalization on the one hand, and practice within higher education institutions (HEIs) on the other, is an ongoing challenge in international and comparative education. This is mainly because it is widely argued in the literature of each theoretical strand (globalization and internationalism) that the phenomena, both as theory and process, are multi-disciplinary, relatively new, complex and rapidly changing. Getting a grasp on the many different dimensions of these terms, and their implications for universities is by no means easy. At a general level, our emphasis in this chapter is on the intersection or parallels between internationalism and globalization rather than the perceived distinctions between the two concepts. At the more specific level, we take the view that the distinction between the term internationalism (as an ideology and belief) and internationalization (as an accompanying process) are limited to their semantic differences. We will use the terms accordingly.

Setting the scene A comprehensive presentation of theoretical propositions within critical pedagogy or education studies as they relate to internationalism and



Internationalization and Globalization

107

globalization would be beyond the scope of this chapter. Related discourses, which may also include critical cultural studies and their genesis, would be better appreciated in the works of others such as Bourdieu (1984), Bernstein (1977), Apple (2006) and Young and Muler (2007). Nevertheless, we use two main strands of critical education studies to frame our discussions in this chapter. First, we draw on Apple’s (2006) dominant proposition that ideology – in this instance, a particular interpretation of internationalism and globalization – shapes operational activities such as curricular approaches in higher education in particular ways. Second, we apply Young and Muler’s (2007) discussion on the sociology of knowledge. They draw on Cassirer, Durkheim and Vygotsky to argue that the distinguishing mark between the human being and animals of a lower order is that human beings create and acquire knowledge and use it to transform the world while animals can only adapt to the world as they find it. These presuppositions place on us a duty to consider, and refocus on, the link between the embedded values of internationalism and globalization as a theory on the one hand, and learning and teaching on the other, in order to assist or encourage reflective practice. This means that the acquisition and use of knowledge in transforming learning and teaching must be done through asking challenging but transformational and analytical questions rather than prescribing the right solutions (Chau and Kerry 2008). The chapter is presented in three main parts: 1 The first section offers an historical overview on internationalization and/or globalization. We draw on a perspective of cross-cultural exchange and argue that it pre-dates the rise of nationalism and the concept of globalization. This historical context is important so that we can assess ‘how we have got where we are’ in terms of practice in today’s universities and how that practice evolved. 2 The second section delves briefly into the ways in which both internationalization and globalization are conceptualized and interpreted, before identifying the fundamental values which characterize globalization both as a theory and a process, and posing questions which practitioners need to raise and answer in their own situations. 3 In section three, we highlight how our perspective of theorizing internationalism and globalization could be used as a means of reflecting on learning and teaching at institutional and programme or course levels.

108

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Historical perspectives in internationalism and globalization in higher education Internationalism and globalization, and especially their application to higher education, are not new ideas; they have been long-existing and shifting phenomena. The notion of nationalism and/or internationalism in European higher education in particular has taken the form we know today as a result of the changes that took place in the nineteenth century. This was the period when the aftermath of the French Revolution (from 1789) paved the way for the demise of huge multi-cultural and national empires that led to the emergence of new nation-states resulting from successful struggles for independence. Contemporary writers acknowledge that crosscultural or border movements, especially of ideas and people, have taken different paces, phases and dimensions from an historical timeline that pre-dates contemporary nation states. The historical descriptions most relevant to internationalism and globalization in higher education, especially in Western civilization, contain accounts of increasing intensity in the Middle Ages (the period from the fifth to the fifteenth century). It is also argued that the periods of the Reformation and Enlightenment, which followed, experienced a relatively high degree of cross-cultural exchanges and initiatives (Ngwana 2010) (for further reflections on the role of the Enlightenment see Chapter 2). Different explanations are offered for such developments. Pedersen (1997) attributes this spirit of mobility during the Carolingian Renaissance to the fear that the world may be coming to an end at AD 1000, which coincided with an increase in prosperity stemming from new institutions and ideas. Though these movements are seen as evident, two fundamental questions still preoccupy historians of higher education: one is whether a credible account of the nature of the motives of mobility can be rendered by using nation-state as a unit of analysis; the other is whether higher education was appropriately defined in this period. Scott (1998), and Neave and Van Vught (1994), observe that the essence of higher learning or advanced scholarship pre-dates the contemporary nation-state. Also, De Wit (2002) argues that apart from religious motives, academic pilgrimage (peregrinatio) was common on the roads of Europe even before the 12th century. This provides a justifiable premise to infer that early cross-border movements such as those recounted in De Wit (2002) refer to cultural borders rather than national borders. So we can reasonably conclude that borders between peoples were never hermetically sealed against the passage of ideas.



Internationalization and Globalization

109

A second perspective of historical analysis relates to the identification of the first universities. Scholars in this area tend to be split between those who think higher education originated from Eastern civilization, those who think it originated in ancient Egypt, and those who suggest that Ancient Greece and Medieval Europe were the cradles of modern higher education (De Wit 2002; Pedersen 1997). Two factors seem to obscure a historical consensus on the true cradle of higher education. One is that in the periods before and during the Middle Ages, the concept of university education was not developed and what counted as a university is, historically, not clear. Another is that written history that focuses on universities is sparse; consequently, historical accounts making such claims need to be treated with caution (Pedersen 1997: 1). An example is that some English historians of higher education such as Daniel (1996) hypothesize that King Alfred the Great had already founded the University of Oxford by the ninth century. If true, this means that the University of Oxford pre-dates the universities of Paris (between 1160 and 1170) and Bologna (1088). On the other hand, in continental Europe, some scholars believe that the University of Paris is a direct descendant of Plato’s old academy, which was moved to Paris via Rome. Daniel (1996) claims that the University of Oxford was established in its modern form in AD 1167 after English students were expelled from Bologna for bad behaviour. This variation in explanations implies that the debate on the international history of higher education has ideological undertones which are understandably about seeking a place in history. Despite these disagreements on the historical path of internationalism and globalization in higher education, our interpretation in this chapter is that contemporary higher education in Europe and its cross-cultural agenda can be traced back to around the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. This includes, but is not limited to, developments in Bologna, Oxford and Paris. A more contemporary narrative indicates that the second part of the nineteenth century saw a sudden emergence of a strong sense of political and cultural nationalism especially in Europe (De Wit 2002: 7). Nation-states during this period presented the dominant platform for the development of ideological, cultural and political distinctions. In terms of higher learning, this trend had already been evident in the form of prohibition of study abroad in some countries, and replacing Latin as a universal language with local (national) languages after 1700. Scott (1998) argues that the emphasis in these exchanges shifted from academic to mostly cultural components. The ‘culture’ implied here is

110

International Perspectives on Higher Education

different from that described in the medieval period because it is ‘territorised’ as Robertson et al. (2002) put it, and based on the nation-state rather than on the sub-groups of the ancient Roman Empire. Universities at this time became institutions that would serve the ideological and professional needs of the new European nations and the specific values they defined. This resonates with Apple’s (2006) reflection on the relationship between ideology and educational structures, content and practice. National identity and the assertion of a place within the international/global power dynamics became the motivations for creating transformational knowledge (Young and Muler 2007). From internationalization to globalization Contemporary scholars have been interested in depicting the pace at which developments in globalization and internationalism within the twentieth century have unfolded. Robinson and Lee (2007) for instance, observe that during the period after the Second World War (1945 onward), there was a significant level of stalling in terms of cross-border exchanges because of the ideological split between the Eastern and Western blocks. However, after the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, a new wave of movement towards the expansion of worldwide horizons resumed in all aspects of human activities including higher education. Since then, although geographical and political boundaries remain important, they are no longer the primary units of analysis. Rather, this development entails the introduction of the theory of globalization in higher education. Generally, this trend has been compounded by an increasing demand for higher education in many countries (Johnston 2002). This is due to what is described as the knowledge economy (Castells 1996; see the discussion in Chapter 8). The role of knowledge in this type of economy is further clarified by Carnoy (1995) in the observation that various changes in production models have significantly raised the value of knowledge, its modes of production and value in economic growth, thereby affecting the ‘payoff to education’ (ibid.: 3). He cites the evidence since around 1975 which suggests that rates of return to investment in higher education in the Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs) and developed countries have risen relative to those relating to school-level education. Similarly, Halsey et al. (1997) argue that in the most developed countries (MDCs) – despite the fact that education systems were blamed for the economic problems of the 1970s and 1980s – the ability to deliver the political and economic wills of the political élite remained unshakable.



Internationalization and Globalization

111

They further note that a ‘new consensus’ has emerged whereby the far right and left of the political spectrum have agreed on the role of higher education in economic prosperity. The role attributed to higher education in innovation would resonate even more today, given the circumstances prevailing under the global economic recession – especially in most Western industrialized countries. A global recognition that a well-educated workforce is essential for nations’ economic and social development and recovery would continuously drive this trend. Global response to this ascendancy in the currency of, and hence demand for, higher education has been the changing pattern of worldwide, cross-border supply for higher education. Daniel (1996) argues that the scale of demand for higher education worldwide is such that in order to meet up with it, one university will need to be established every week. This development arguably introduces two competing, albeit interrelated, paradigms: the notion of markets, and hence competition, in higher education services as structured by the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS); and the emphasis on the building of world capacity through international collaboration and cooperation. Considering that higher education resources are not equally distributed worldwide, some areas would benefit from relative advantage and attract more students. English language and new information and communication technologies (NICT) (see Chapter 9) will play a vital role developing the relative advantage. These possibilities are not necessarily viewed as complementary or unproblematic by some educators. Brooke and Buckley (1988: 371), for instance, note that the concept of selling education, let alone selling it abroad, is both unfamiliar and offensive to many pedagogues and educators. However, they are referring primarily to the notion of trade in educational services rather than offering education services abroad. Though John Daniel’s vision (doubtless conditioned by his role with the Open University) was ahead of its time, his prediction about demand for higher education came when, in practice, universities were still predominantly conceived as campus-based. Furthermore, international dynamics such as the GATS were not yet fully conceived. Daniel later moved on from being the Deputy Director of United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) to become the chief executive of the Common Wealth of Learning (COL). This could be interpreted as a way of following up his reflection on tackling the predicted challenge in higher education. Judging from the focus and objectives of COL, it would be fair to infer that his view on leveraging globalization to resolve this

112

International Perspectives on Higher Education

challenge of demand would rather focus on collaboration and cooperation. Globalization in the context of these changing dynamics becomes a viable transformational platform for increasing world capacity. Summary To summarize, the historical and economic accounts indicate that the nature of the contemporary demand for, and provision of, higher education is increasingly transcending national contexts as we move into the second decade of the new millennium. This implies that two main historically derived factors may help in describing the contemporary internationalization of higher education: 1 The universality of knowledge: hence the opportunities offered by globalization in terms of networking or collaboration. 2 The persistent existence of institutions and regions of relatively high and low factor endowment. A thorough analysis of these factors is outside the scope of this chapter. However, the historical debate suggests that cross-cultural or border movements especially of ideas and people have now gone into a phase which proceeds at an unprecedented pace, with potentials and opportunities for either collaboration, cooperation, or both. A critical reflection upon the underlying values of internationalization and globalization at national as well as institutional levels would be central in determining either a balance or a skew in policy direction between collaboration and/ or competition (trade).

Conceptualizing and theorizing internationalism and globalization Scott (1998) points out the tension in these two concepts: that internationalism denotes the primacy of the nation-state as a unit of analysing processes and products. By contrast, globalization, especially from a hyperglobalist perspective, means the demise of the nation-state and puts the emphasis on flows of exchange (Castells 1996) that ignore national boundaries. That might suggest that internationalism is defined differently from globalization or even viewed as a fundamentally opposing concept.



Internationalization and Globalization

113

However, Scott does not discount the fact that, in practical terms, there are some intersections between them – especially in terms of embedded values. A further related term is regionalization (Scott 1998) which may also be central to understanding developments in the capitalist economy. Regionalization is an extended form of internationalization whereby the role of the nation-state is recognized under the auspices of a supranational state (e.g. the European Union). Callan (2000) argues that the balance between the three conceptualizations makes a difference in policy terms. In conceiving these terms in this chapter we recognize that, though there might be qualitative differences between them, nevertheless their impacts on the various functions within higher education institutions and systems tend not to have a corresponding level of distinction. An underlying assumption of this chapter is that internationalism in higher education is premised on the values broadly presupposed by both globalization and regionalization, too. With respect to the overlap between globalization and internationalism, the fundamental argument for both sceptics and hyperglobalizers as outlined by Held et al. (1999) is centred on the concepts of competitiveness and development. These concepts underpin the values which drive institutional or micro processes. Competitiveness has emerged as a major driving force for discussing the relative position of both the nation-state and organizations within the context of globalization. Castells (1996), Lee and Peterson (2000) and Boudreau et al. (1998) develop a perspective that leverages new information and communication technologies to mediate productivity at micro and macro (i.e. national) levels. The sense of competitiveness portrayed by this school of authors is underpinned by neo-classical economic theories that recognize the primacy of efficiency of private enterprises, free trade, and the extent to which a private enterprise with global reach is driving the political and economic priorities of the nation-state and institutions (even HEIs). This trend is seen in HEIs, for example, in the case of person specifications in vacancy adverts in the media for positions such as Dean of Student Services – roles which demand a track-record for delivering costumer services in the corporate sector as an essential criteria for appointment. At the international level this has, since 2005, become a subject of an annual report (The Global Competitiveness Report-GCR), in which nationstates are rated on a league table according to specific indices categorized under what is called the 12 pillars. It is worth noting that one of the 12 pillars of global competitiveness is ‘higher education and training’ whose quality is measured solely by the business community (Schwab et al. 2010).

114

International Perspectives on Higher Education

This highlights the role of the market and its inherent neo-liberal values in driving policies in higher education. Thus these underlying philosophical positions drive the political/policy stances that determine the nature of higher education in specific contexts. Other authors, such as Lall (2001), question the very essence of the issues for which we are competing or what counts as development. Their view is driven by the argument that, if there must be categories that underlie macro (national and regional) and micro (organizational and local) policies, with far reaching social implications, these must take into consideration the human elements in addition to the market. It is this discourse that gives reason to a parallel assessment of the human condition, as exemplified by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in their use of the Human Development Index (HDI) in compiling the Human Development Report (HDR). The HDR uses concepts and dimensions such as empowerment, equality and sustainability in developing its indices rather than efficiency, consumer choice and individual autonomy, which dominate the indices of global competitiveness (UNDP 2010). The HDR goes so far as to highlight the findings from their research: that the relationship between economic growth and the improvement of key elements of human well-being such as health and education in a significant number of countries is in fact weaker than previously thought (UNDP 2010: 66). In these incipient debates one sees the genesis of the ideological battles in education between, for example, those promoting vocational philosophies and those championing knowledge as intrinsic. Halliday (1999) highlights the persistence of market language in domains which might be fundamentally measured in human terms, such as education, in the policies of multi-lateral bodies like the World Bank and the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Development economists such as Stiglitz (2006) and Sen (1999), both winners of the Nobel Prize in Economics, argue that the essence of the concept of globalization is in itself a sound basis of human development. They do, however, add that the conceptualization and management of globalization tend to be at odds with some fundamental elements of human development. Stieglitz (2006: 166) cites examples of anti-competitive practices in international trade to demonstrate historic notions of hegemony which have become ingrained in the existence of some dominant nation-states. The UNESCO (2003) position paper outlines unequivocally that one of the main aspects that has transformed the scope of internationalization of higher education is its market dynamic and its inclusion in the GATS. This



Internationalization and Globalization

115

view construes the dynamics of internationalization of higher education in the same light as other processes driven by globalization. The following commentaries from Marginson and Rhoades (2002: 282) align with the above observation: Today higher education in every corner of the globe is being influenced by global economic, cultural and educational forces and higher education institutions themselves (as well as units and constituencies within them) are increasingly global actors, extending their influence across the world. The main concern raised by Marginson and Rhoades (2002) is that most studies in comparative higher education have concentrated on neo-liberal reforms at national macro level but there has been very little done on the role of international or regional agencies in shaping national state policies. This missing link between the macro and micro levels of conceptualization is equally highlighted by Halliday (1999), who made two interrelated observations on the globalization of higher education. The first is the notion of convergence with respect to funding policies. He states that spending in primary and secondary education has converged in OECD countries by 4 per cent while convergence within higher education is barely 1.6 per cent. These statistics imply that OECD member states are more likely to have a similar spending pattern in primary and secondary education than higher education. This emphasizes the argument that the assumption of a coherent and universal convergence in terms of values of globalization is problematic: institutions can choose strategic directions of their own without fundamentally contradicting key values of globalization. Halliday’s second point is that certain ways of conceptualizing globalization results in the subordination of higher education policy variables to the notion of the market. He argues that the notion of a knowledge economy, sold by such international agencies as the World Bank and OECD is designed to impact on government policies in education in general. These organizations have carried out successive studies demonstrating that a country’s economic and strategic competitiveness is correlated to its level of education. This relationship presupposes that higher education is a deciding factor for a country’s global competitiveness. Marginson and Rhoades’ (2002) premises show that convergence (which is mainly related to globalization as a process) is less prominent in micro policy development than embedded values such as competitiveness. He singles out the UK government by positing that the rhetoric which summarizes the

116

International Perspectives on Higher Education

previous New Labour government’s policy, namely ‘Education, Education, Education’, did not affect higher education to bring about converging micro policies. Rather, it was New Labour’s way of introducing the notion of free market (a neo-liberal value) through tuition fee policies. Halliday (1999) further argues that both the Robbins Report (1963) and the Dearing Report (1997) have concentrated excessively on fees, though this is not the only problem facing British higher education. Thus, the recent Browne Review (2010) goes beyond fees to examine the global market implications. The Browne Review states that HEIs in the UK have become aware of the competition from Australasia, Europe and North America in terms of market shares in international student recruitment. The Review of 2010 reiterates the point that international students ‘are estimated to generate £3.3 bn of output across the economy and over 27,800 jobs’ (p. 15). Thus Browne raises the important notion of market share, and rehearses how this aspect of internationalization would enhance the UK’s position on the global competitiveness league table. Internationalism, globalization and policy-making at the micro level If the underlying philosophies of internationalization and globalization drive the policy-makers at a macro level, how do institutions and their managers shape up at the micro level? Are institutions in tune with these deep-seated trends? Conflicting theories and ideologies have surfaced on policy, structures and support systems in institutions. This may suggest a conjectural split in academia between sceptics (traditionalists), hyperglobalists and transformationalists (Held et al. 1999). Thus, in a survey of 20,000 academic staff in 14 countries, Welch (1997) found that some of the largest and most mature higher education systems are poorly internationalized and that internationalization does not correlate to age or size of HEIs. He attributed this to the fact that HEIs are faced with what he refers to as parochialism and inertia. Such findings could be a sign that scepticism is active to a significant degree in some institutions. Nevertheless, almost 15 years on, it is still not clear to us if there is overwhelming evidence of an alternative explanation and theory for cross-border education apart from globalization as a leverage or justification. Reflecting on the implications of globalization Sadlak (1998: 107) notes that practitioners in higher education have only just started setting their international life in ‘ways that allow us (or them) to deal with the multifaceted nature of the phenomenon’.



Internationalization and Globalization

117

Sadlak’s view refers to a wide range of functions within higher education – including learning, teaching, leadership and management – to which globalization might be applied. Mason (1998) confirmed the same argument with specific respect to learning and teaching in higher education. Mason, who works in the area of Education Technology, asks critical questions relating to what could be the relationship between the strategic and operating principles in terms of learning and teaching for a truly global university. The main contributions by both Sadlak (1998) and Mason (1998) lie in their attempt to apply the transformational approach to highlight how globalization and internationalism can be used as a discourse for practitioner research in learning and teaching. What of the future? A summary So where do these concepts go from here? We draw on Kolb (1984) to argue that the changing and complex nature of the theories of internationalism and globalization require constant reflection that might help move practitioners from abstract conceptualization to active experimentation. Practitioners need to consider the implications for learning and teaching, viewed both strategically and operationally. In this chapter we choose to adopt a transformational model as proposed by Stiglitz (2006) and Sen (1999), which differs from the process model of conceptualizing internationalism and globalization. The latter provides a quantifiable description of convergence, homogenization and generalization (Tsuruta 2003). We explore the values within institutional policies which are enclosed in these processes (McBurnie 2001; Faquhar 1999). The emphasis becomes the qualitative content of these processes, which includes values such as competition and cooperation. Our perspective resonates with Stiglitz and Sen in terms of their emphasis on ‘competition in cooperation’ and ‘collaboration rather than competition’ as instinctive hegemonic goals. Argyris and Schöns’ (1992) proposal on two theories of action might thus be instrumental in moving from a purely theoretical approach to practice or active experimentation. We need to ask: ●●

●●

Theories-in-use: what model of internationalized and/or globalized institutions implicitly informs our learning and teaching strategy? Espoused theory: how do we interpret and communicate our perspectives on internationalism and/or globalization along the complex continuum that ranges from policies and practices that are driven by instinctive hegemony to competition in cooperation and collaboration?

118

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Our proposed view of globalization could also be taken further by considering the application of single and double-loop learning originally developed by Argyris and Schön (1974). The choice will be between a range of options from defending the notion of competitiveness and being economical with facts relating to the hegemonic agenda that may be mirrored in the mere thirst of world leadership, to presenting possibly opposing and conflicting views of internationalism/globalization with supporting facts and evidence for evaluation hence encouraging a wider testing of the governing principles. According to Argyris and Schön (1974) the former would result in singleloop learning at a micro level, which means being reluctant to embrace a critical re-examination of existing practice. Argyris (1976) re-enforced his critique of Cohen and March (1974), describing their insistence on singleloop learning as organized anarchy. This view is portrayed in the following statement in the context of an organization: Cohen and March (1974: 205) state explicitly: ‘First, we do not believe that any major new cleverness that would conspicuously alter the prevailing limits in our ability to change the course of history (in organizational theory and practice) will be discovered.’ However, a few pages later (Cohen and March, 1974: 215), in the fascinating section on ‘Technology of Foolishness’, they raise questions about certain ‘robust faiths’ that have become segments of contemporary Western civilization, such as the concept of choice, which assumes pre-existence of purpose, the necessity of consistency, and the primacy of rationality. Their questions seem to imply that the course of history may be alterable, and it is not surprising that this inconsistency appears in a section in which Cohen and March attempt to apply their framework to develop practical advice to administration . . .we do not believe that any major new cleverness that would conspicuously alter the prevailing limits in our ability to change the course of history (ibid.: 363). Agyris (1976: 369) provides the following definition of ‘double-loop’ learning in the same study: . . . in the double-loop model, the unilateral control that usually accompanies advocacy is rejected because the typical purpose of advocacy is to win; and so, articulateness and advocacy are coupled with an invitation to confront one another’s views and to alter them, in order to produce the position that is based on the most complete valid information possible and to which participants can become internally committed.



Internationalization and Globalization

119

Argyris (1976) however emphasizes that an essential pre-condition for double-loop learning to be instituted in the leadership process is for the organization, through individuals, to be totally transparent about their goals, agenda or purpose. When interpreted in terms of globalization and internationalism in higher education one would ask the following key questions: 1 How can practices in HEIs, especially learning and teaching, be driven by a neo-Darwinian and hegemonic competitiveness? 2 How can practices in HEIs, especially learning and teaching, be driven by the zeal for global capacity building? The next section of this chapter briefly explores what implications our answers might have for learning and teaching in higher education, by examining areas where relevant sub-questions may emerge as part of reflective practice.

Implications for higher education learning and teaching In Chapter 4, Robinson outlined some of the factors that drive higher education managers in the current climate. Inevitably they resonate with the themes of this chapter. It has almost become a consensus that the values implied in the language of neo-liberalism – such as consumer choice, efficiency, individual autonomy, government risk aversion, private enterprise/entrepreneurialism, free trade and other related concepts – are considered as organizing principles at the macro or national levels. The last 20 years have seen a huge amount of theorizing and comparative international studies on globalizing trends at macro national level (Scott 2000; Dos Santos 2000; Dale and Robertson 2003; De Wit 2002; Wilson 1994; Husen 1994; Blight 1999; Faquhar 1999). One of the key arguments that drives higher education policies is the notion of persuading institutions either to adapt or be left behind. This has been recently fuelled by the introduction of a global universities league table in 2003. According to Marginson and Van der Wende (2007: 34): ‘Every research university wants to lift its reputation. All are focused on policies to lift capacity and performance.’ However, Marginson and his colleagues also implicitly recognize an earlier critique by Naidoo (2005) about consequences of unreflective preference of neo-Darwinian competitiveness rather than cooperation and collaboration. Both in Robinson’s chapter, and the work reported in

120

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Chapters 1 and 2 on ethical approaches to higher education, we have seen important facets of the debate about values, and where and how these drive policy. Debates on the impact of the neo-liberal agenda upon higher education are quite frequently linked to the relationship between teaching and research and scholarship (Light et al. 2009; Barnett 2005). Naidoo (2005) draws on Bourdieu’s work on the economic, social and cultural agenda to identify the impact of commodification on academic and scientific capital in higher education. She argues that the academic capital is undervalued in favour of scientific capital because of the relative proximity of their relationships with income generation. Quite simply, science attracts income. Naidoo’s observation is that in the context of commodification the pedagogic relationship between the student and the lecturer is defined by market conditions whereby the lecturer is the producer or provider of the service and the student is the consumer or customer. In this type of relationship the demand for accountability or sharing of responsibility is straightforward. She further argues that this distorts a relationship which in educational terms is integrated. Other authors such as Amory et al. (2004) broadly concur with this observation, but articulate an important distinction: Higher education institutions have been subjected to two different phases of commodification, in the conversion of intellectual activity into intellectual capital, and in the conversion of instruction itself into commercially viable proprietary products that can be owned and bought and sold in the market. Commodification and its conceptualization align with governmental agendas through funding policies as well as institutional recruitment practices especially in terms of learning and teaching. The funding by university managements of job roles such as ‘Dean of Student Experience’ – an individual with a marketing background rooted in the private sector – has become common practice. Naidoo (2005: 31–2) specifically describes some of the tendencies as follows: ●●

●●

The notion of efficiency introduces economies of scale as a means of maximizing income generation. This leads to excessive standardization of learning resources. The tendency to develop programme structures that have packaging features in order that they should have market value (as indicated by Amory and colleagues above).

●●

●●

Internationalization and Globalization

121

The tendency to recognize and reward ‘teacher proof delivery’ as viable. This involves designing courses and teaching resources in a manner that could be taught by less well qualified teachers without a sound knowledge base of the subject matter. The tendency to accept a system of feedback to students which is excessively ‘rolled up’ into summative assessment.

We recognize two issues related to the discourse on globalization, internationalism and higher education. These are: first, the tides of change which any critical scholarship faces; and second, the criticism against the ideological left for offering little by way of alternative to prevailing trends. Roberts (1998 on http://www.sociology.org/content/vol003.003/roberts. html) captures this point in the following statements: On matters of tertiary education, the gulf between those who play this language game – subscribe to the grand narrative of market liberalism – and those who wish to defend almost any other position on the purpose and character of a university is enormous. There is no rule that might be found to adjudicate between the parties involved in this dispute without one side being wronged, but to date the battle has been overwhelmingly one-sided. The litigating activities of politicians, bureaucrats and business elites have ensured that differences are hardly ever acknowledged, and questions about ‘lesser evils’ seldom seriously considered. However, Roberts points out that a glimmer of hope can be found in reflecting on student-centred education (see also Chapter 10 of this text) as a philosophical starting point, rather than on market function. In that way students will be encouraged through programme designs to ‘question – to analyse, to criticise, to wonder, to become aware of alternatives’. Thus neither students, nor their institutions and supporting governments are slaves to the inevitable ebb and flow of the tides of globalization.

Conclusion The main aim of this chapter has been to explore the interface between theory and practice through the concept(s) of internationalism/globalization in higher education, especially in terms of their implications for learning and teaching. One of the challenges for practitioner researchers is examining globalization/internationalism as more than just a cliché

122

International Perspectives on Higher Education

that justifies knee-jerk reaction. We have examined the phenomenon as a theory that is laden with specific values rather than a process which uses quantifiable evidence and arguments to justify natural adaptation to it. Three interrelated arguments have been developed in the chapter. First, we used historical perspectives to observe that the movement of people for the purpose of seeking knowledge has gone through major stages whereby the units of analysis have changed as a function of the geo-political and ideological contexts. We argued that the second decade of the twenty-first century is seeing a phase whereby unprecedented potentials and opportunities have emerged for either collaboration and cooperation or a neo-Darwinian type competition, or a combination of both, between institutions and systems. Second, we drew on a series of works by Argyris and Schön to propose an approach through a value model for conceptualizing internationalism and/ or globalization in higher education, by posing questions that instigate practitioner research and development in higher education learning and teaching. Third, we observed that the uncritical commodification of learning and teaching is as a result of crude, rather than considered, adaptation to internationalism and globalization as a process. We proposed two alternatives to commodification of learning and teaching, especially with respect to the student: 1 The role of the student as a partner or co-constructor of knowledge rather than an agent of the market or client. 2 Opportunities for students to question trends and become aware of possible alternatives. Our broad approach in this chapter, which has also been highlighted in Ngwana (2010), is based on the argument that the practitioner or academic in higher education has an important role to play in moderating and mediating these (macro policy) forces through practitioner research (Campbell et al. 2004). However, there is still a clear shortage of literature on how the implications of internationalism and globalization at micro (institutional and course) levels in higher education institutions can be integrated into practitioner research. Such a reflection or research agenda would attempt to explore questions such as those posed above and perhaps those posed by Mason (1998: 16). 1 What counts as a truly global university or course and why? 2 To what extent do implied neo-liberal values appear necessary for the institution’s survival?



Internationalization and Globalization

123

3 What are the implications for opting for either collaboration or competition in courses or institutions? The point of this chapter has not been to answer these questions but to highlight some themes that can be used in developing a practitioner research agenda.

References Amory, A. M., Dubbeld, C. and Peters, D. P. (2004) ‘Open Content, Open Access and Open Source?’ in Ingede: Journal of African Scholarship. University of KwaZulu Natal. (Published) [Journal article (on-line/unpaginated)] Apple, Michael W. (2006) Educating the ‘Right’ Way: Market, Standards, God and Equality 2nd edn New York: Routledge Argyris, C. (1976) ‘Single-loop and double-loop models in research on decision making’ Administrative Science Quarterly 21 (3) 363–75 Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1992) Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective Reading, MA: Addison Wesley —(1974) Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Barnett, Ronald (2005) Reshaping the University: New Relationships between Research, Scholarship and Teaching, Berkshire: Open University Press Bernstein, Basil (1977) Class, Codes and Control Vol 3, 2nd edn London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Blight, D. (1999) ‘Internationalisation: what Dearing forgot’ in Internationalisation: Is UK plc Competing? A Common Wealth Perspective. Common Wealth Higher Education Management Service Bourdieu, Pierre (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Boudreau, Marie-Claude, Karen D. Loch, Daniel Robey, and Detmar W. Straub, ‘Going Global: Using Information Technology to Advance the Competitiveness of the Virtual Transnational Organization.’ Academy of Management Executive 12 (November 1998) 120–8 Brooke, Michael Z., and Buckley, Peter, J. (1988) Handbook of International Trade, Basingstoke: McMillan Publishers Callan, Hilary (2000) Higher Education Internationalisation: Of marginal significance or All-Pervasive? Higher Education in Europe, Vol. XXV., 1. pp. 15–23 Campbell, A., McNamara, O. and Gilroy, P. (2004) Practitioner Research and Professional Development in Education London: Paul Chapman Carnoy, Martin (1995) Education and the New International Division of Labor IN: International Encyclopedia of Economics of Education, Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 211–17 Castells, M. (1996) ‘The information age: economy, society and culture’ Vol.1 The Rise of the Network Society UK: Blackwell Publishers Chau, Meng Huat and Kerry, Trevor (2008) International Perspectives on Education London: Continuum

124

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Cohen, Michael D. and March, James G. (1974) Leadership and Ambiguity, The American College President New York: McGraw Hill Daniel, S. John (1996) Mega-Universities and Knowledge Media: Technology Strategies for Higher Education London: Kogan Page Ltd De Wit, Hans (2002) Internationalization of Higher Education in the United States of America and Europe: A Historical, Comparative, and Conceptual Analysis. London: Greenwood Press Dos Santos, S. M., (2000) Introduction to the Theme of Transnational Education, Conference of the Directors of Higher Education and Heads of the Rectors’ Conferences of the European Union available on http://www.crue.upm.es/ (18 September 2001) Farquhar, R. H. (1999) ‘Integration or isolation: internationalism and the internet in Canadian higher education’ Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 21 (1) 5–11 Goodlad, Sinclair (1983) ‘Issues, research, action’ in Goodlad, S. ed. Economies of Scale in Higher Education. Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE) Halliday, Fred (1999) The Chimera of the ‘International University’ International Affairs 75 (1) 99–120 Held, David (1999) Global Transformation: Politics, Economics and Culture Stanford: Stanford University Press Held, David, McGrew, Anthony G., Goldbatt, David and Perraton Jonathan (eds) (1999) Global Transformation: Politics, Economics and Culture, Stanford: Stanford University Press. Johnston, Donald (2002) Opening Remarks at OECD Forum on Trade in Education Services. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Washington 23–24 May 2002. Kolb, D. A. (1984) ‘Experiential Learning experience as a source of learning and development’ New Jersey: Prentice Hall Lall, Sanjaya (2001) ‘Competitiveness indices and developing countries: an economic evaluation of the Global Competiveness Report’ World Development 29 (9) 1501–25 Lee, S. M. and Peterson, S. J. (2000) ‘Culture, entrepreneurial orientation and global competitivess’ Journal of World Business 35 (4) 401–16 Light (2009) Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: The Reflective Professional. London: Sage Light, Greg, Cox, Roy, and Calkins, Susanna C. (2009) Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: The Reflective Practitioner, London: Sage Publications. Marginson, S. and Van der Wende, M. (2007) ‘Globalisation and Higher Education’ OECD Education Working Papers No. 8, OECD Publishing Marginson, Simon and Rhoades, G. (2002) ‘Beyond national states, markets and systems of higher education: a glonacal heurestic’ Higher Education 43, 281–309 Mason, Robin (1998) Globalising Education: Trends and Applications London and New York: Routledge McBurnie, Grant (2001) ‘Globalisation: a new paradigm for higher education policy: leveraging globalisation as a policy paradigm in higher education’ Higher Education in Europe XXVI (1) 11–26 Morrow, Raymond and Torres, Carlos A. (2000) The state, globalisation and



Internationalization and Globalization

125

educational policy in Burbules, N. and Torres, C. A. (eds) Globalisation and Education Critical Perspectives New York: Routledge pp. 27–56 Naidoo, Rajani (2005) ‘Universities in the market place: the distortion of teaching and research’ in Barnett, R. ed. Reshaping the University: New Relationships Between Research, Scholarship and Teaching Maidenhead: SRHE and Open University Press pp 27–36. www.unesco.org/iau/globalisation/newsletter-globalisation.html (14 November 2002) Neave, G., and Van Vught, F. (1994) Government and Higher Education Relationships Across Three Continents. The Winds of Change. Issues in Higher Education. Oxford: Emerald Group Publishing Ngwana, Terfot (2010) Internationalisation in United Kingdom Higher Education Institutions: the Impact of General Agreement on Trade in Services. Beau Bassin: VDM Publishing House Ltd Pedersen, Olaf (1997) The First Universities: Stadium Generale and the Origins of University Education in Europe/English Translation by Richard North, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Roberts, Peter (1998)‘Re-reading Lyotard: knowledge commodification and higher education’ Electronic Journal of Sociology available on http://www.sociology.org/ content/vol003.003/roberts.html (accessed 19 June 2011) Robertson, S., Bonal, X. and Dale, R. (2002) Higher Education in the Learning Society, Report 12, London —(2002) GATS and the Education Service Industry: The Politics of Scale and Global Re-territorialisation. Comparative Education Review, vol. 43, (3) Robinson, Simon and Lee, Simon (2007) Global Ethics on the Ascent, in Jones, Elspeth and Brown, Sally (eds) Internationalising Higher Education, London: Routledge Sadlak, Jan (1998)‘Globalisation and Concurrent Challenges for Higher Education’ in Scott, P. ed. The Globalization of Higher Education, Buckingham: Open University Press Schwab, Klaus (2010) The Global Competitiveness Report 2010–2011, World Economic Forum Schwab, Klaus, Sala-i-Martin, Xavier and Greenhill, Robert (2009) The Global Competitiveness Report 2009–2010, Geneva: World Economic Forum Scott, Peter (1998) ‘Massification, internationalization and globalization’ in Scott, P. ed.The Globalisation of Higher Education, Buckingham, SRHE and Open University Press pp. 109–29 —ed. (2000) Higher Education Re-formed. London: Falmer Press Sen, Amartya (1999) Development as Freedom Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press Stiglitz, J. (2006) Making Globalisation Work Allen Lane: Penguin Tsuruta, Yoko (2003) The Globalisation, Regionalisation and Internationalisation of Higher Education with Special Reference to Japan – A Theoretical Consideration. A paper presented at the British Educational Research Association annual conference, Herriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, 11–13 September 2003 UNDP (2010) The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development, UNDP, Human Development Report 2010 UNESCO (2003) Higher Education in the Globalized Society. UNESCO Education Position Paper

126

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Welch, Anthony R. (1997) ‘The peripatetic professor: the internationalisation of academic professions’ Higher Education in Europe 34, 323–45 Wilson, David (1994) Comparative and international education: fraternal or Siamese twins? A preliminary geneology of our twin fields. Presidential Address. Comparative Education Review 38, 449–86 Young, Michael (2003) Curriculum Studies and the Problem of Knowledge: Updating the Enlightenment? Paper Presented at the Education, Policy, Innovation and Change Research Group (EPIG) Education Department, University of Bath, Bath 14th March 2003 Young, M. and Muler, J. (2007) ‘Truth and truthfulness in the sociology of educational knowledge’ Theory and Research in Education 5 (2) 173–201

Chapter 6

Curricular Design and Assessment: Moving Towards a Global Template Kent Löfgren

Introduction The recent and extensive higher education reforms in Europe, including the Bologna Process and the subsequent creation and establishment of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), have resulted in widespread consequences for academics and students. Supported by the European Union (2010) and the European University Association (2010), these new strategies and agreements are supposedly making European higher education a part of the most competitive economy on the practice of delivering higher education to students around the world. This chapter explores these new efforts and their effects on curricular design and assessment, with a particular focus on the departmental and university instructor levels; it is argued that such is where most of the work to implement these extensive and internationally synchronized schemes is occurring. It is, therefore, important to investigate and discuss what is being done at those fundamental levels in order to understand fully the impact of the new templates that are affecting the teaching and learning in Europe and beyond. Initiatives and experiences from a university in one of the member countries of the EHEA (Sweden) are discussed, along with results from recent reports and contemporary research within the field.

Background The Bologna Process (1999–2010), the largest reform in European higher education to occur in recent decades, has led to an increased harmonization of and greater transparency for study-programmes, credit systems, degrees and course syllabi. Founded and established during 1999–2010, in accord with a number of communiqués and agreements among the participating countries, it has resulted in the creation of the European Higher

128

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Education Area (EHEA) – a region for collaboration in higher education that comprises 47 countries in and beyond Europe. The Bologna Process has affected the curriculum and a great deal of work has been accomplished by undergraduate studies directors and university instructors in order to implement this reform. The reform has exerted an influence on teaching and instruction in a multitude of states across Europe and beyond, including Australia, where the Ministry for Education Science and Training stated that the Bologna Process would likely ‘influence developments in higher education in many parts of the world’ and that the process would ‘have important implications for Australian higher education’ (Australian Ministry for Education Science and Training 2006: 1). An important part of EHEA is the European credit transfer and accommodation system (ECTS). The ministers responsible for higher education have agreed to use the ECTS as a backbone in the synchronization of their systems of higher education, which, in turn, obliges the participating countries to implement the concept of learning outcomes (LO) on both the level of curricula for study-programmes and the level of syllabi for individual courses. LOs are written descriptions that show what an undergraduate or a postgraduate student knows and can perform after the completion of a study-programme or course. The implementation of the ECTS system and the increased use of LOs has meant that university teachers, particularly those in countries where LOs were not previously used as educational tools to express educational goals, have had to expand their knowledge about how to develop, write and use LOs in programmes and courses. This chapter focuses on the departmental and university instructor levels in order to discuss how teachers learned to use LOs as curricular tools to express educational goals. The examples will be taken from the author’s home university in Sweden, which has been one of the EHEA member countries since the original Bologna Declaration was signed in 1999.

The origin of LOs, the Three-Cycle System and ECTS Credits Learning outcomes (LOs) were first introduced and discussed in the Bologna Process and the EHEA in two European University Association (EUA) reports and the 2003 Berlin Communiqué. The first EUA report, Trends 2003 (European University Association, 2003a), stated that it was of great importance that the agreements and legislations in the Bologna Process evolved into institutional structures and procedures. It



Curricular Design and Assessment

129

also advocated for higher education institutions to define terms such as ‘learning outcomes’. The second report, the Graz Declaration (European University Association 2003b: 9), further argued that it was important to discuss and develop ‘learning outcomes at the European level’. The Graz Declaration, while pointing to the diversity of universities across Europe and arguing for opportunities for collaboration, stated that institutions should ‘encourage the definition of learning outcomes and competences’ (2003b: 9). The Berlin Communiqué stated that the ministers responsible for higher education took ‘note of the message from the European University Association (EUA) arising from the Graz Convention’ (Berlin Communiqué 2003: 2). The ministers responded that they would ‘improve the recognition system of degrees and periods of studies’ (Berlin Communiqué 2003: 3), and that participating nation states should ‘elaborate a framework of comparable and compatible qualifications’ that describe experience in terms of learning outcomes (Berlin Communiqué 2003: 4). In 2005, LOs were further discussed in a report issued by a working group on qualifications (Bologna Working Group on Qualifications Frameworks, 2005). This report, which was published in conjunction with the Berlin Communiqué (2005), recommended that the so-called Dublin Descriptors developed by the Joint Quality Initiative should be used, and LOs, which were defined as ‘statements of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to do at the end of a period of learning’ (p. 37), should be used throughout the EHEA. The Bergen Communiqué further stipulated that the overarching framework for qualifications in the EHEA should be comprised of ‘three cycles (including, within national contexts, the possibility of intermediate qualifications)’ (Bergen Communiqué 2005: 2). The three cycles, which designed the template for higher education in the EAHE, were first implemented in 2003. Before that year, the Bologna reform had only focused on the undergraduate and master’s degree cycles. This emphasis changed after the Berlin meeting in 2003, when the ministers considered ‘it necessary to go beyond the present focus on two main cycles of higher education to include the doctoral level as the third cycle in the Bologna Process’ (Berlin Communiqué 2003: 7). This meant that ‘first cycle degrees should give access [...] to second cycle programmes’ and that ‘second cycle degrees should give access to doctoral studies’ (Berlin Communiqué 2003: 4). At the Bergen meeting in 2005, the ministers stated that, in order to succeed with the implementation of the Bologna Process, ‘doctoral level qualifications need to be fully aligned with the EHEA’s overarching framework for qualifications using the outcomes-based approach’.

130

International Perspectives on Higher Education

They further emphasized the ‘need for structured doctoral programmes and the need for transparent supervision and assessment’ and that ‘the normal workload of the third cycle in most countries would correspond to 3–4 years full time’ (Bergen Communiqué 2005: 4).

Higher education in Sweden As in many European countries, higher education in Sweden is the responsibility of the national government and the parliament (the Riksdag). These entities determine the pertinent laws, regulations and guidelines and allocate resources to both the state-run and private institutions of higher education. Currently there are 17 state-run and 3 private universities and institutions of higher education that have the right to award postgraduate degrees in Sweden. The five largest, which are state-run, include Gothenburg, Lund, Stockholm, Umeå and Uppsala universities. Although the state stipulates the basic rules and regulations, the universities have considerable autonomy concerning strategic planning, the allocation of fiscal resources, the recruitment of teachers and students, and the day-to-day fulfilment of teaching and research functions. For example, the universities are free to make many decisions regarding the content of the programme and course syllabi within the boundaries of the law. To a certain extent, the universities are also empowered to make local interpretations of concepts such as ‘basic and advanced level’, ‘learning outcomes’ and ‘progression in higher education’, and to design the studyprogrammes and courses based on those interpretations. Although Sweden signed the Bologna Declaration in its inaugural year of 1999, most efforts to implement the Bologna reform occurred several years later. The Swedish government ratified the Lisbon Convention (Council of Europe, 1997) in August 2001. However, besides these changes, the national implementation of the Bologna Process was moving at such a slow pace between 2001 and 2004 that the Chancellor for Higher Education in Sweden, Professor Sigbrit Franke, made the following comment in early 2005: When the Bologna Declaration was signed, a lot of institutions began to prepare to develop the syllabi according to what was outlined in the Declaration. However, this work has come to a halt, in my opinion, awaiting decisions from the Government. The institutions are impatiently waiting for the Governmental Bill, hoping that it will make things clear. (Franke 2005: 2, author’s translation)



Curricular Design and Assessment

131

The process gained momentum in June 2005 with the publication of a governmental bill (New World: New University, 2004). It was presented to all institutions of higher education in Sweden and it outlined the proposed government policy and aimed to inform and stimulate discussion. Although it did not furnish detailed instructions, it indicated the work that had to be planned and executed on the local level in the immediate future. Consequently, it sparked an intensified debate and planning throughout Sweden. In an investigation about the employability of graduates and students’ satisfaction in Sweden and one other European country (Portugal), Edvardsson Stiwne and Gaio Alves (2010) note that ‘although the Bologna Declaration was signed in 1999 the Bologna structure was not implemented in ... Sweden until 2007’ (2010: 33). The final legal measures were enacted in 2007 in order to assure compliance to the reform (Higher Education Ordinance, 2007). These legal measures ensured that all undergraduate and graduate education in Sweden adhered to the Bologna Declaration, and other connecting agreements between the Bologna member states. The measures that came into force in Sweden in 2007 created a new degree system based on the Bologna cycles (i.e. 3 + 2 + 3 years), and a new credit system compliant with the ECTS-credit system. This meant that LOs were introduced in all course documentation. The use of LOs had not been prominent in Sweden prior to the Bologna reform. Therefore, the work accomplished at Swedish universities could provide examples of challenges and conflicts regarding the implementation of the Bologna reform in general and the LOs in particular. Although the new cycle structure, which was introduced in Sweden in 2007, conforms to the requirements of the Bologna Process, it nevertheless retains particular national elements that reflect the historical customs and characteristics of Swedish higher education. For example, although a one-year master’s degree is not common in other European countries, it is available in Sweden due to the country’s tradition of offering a one-year additional educational programme for students who have finished a threeyear undergraduate study-programme. The licentiate award, which also exists, for example, in Finland, is used to indicate that the bearer has received a formal attestation of professional competence and a licence to practice or possess a certain degree of proficiency in some particular academic field. Regarding doctoral education, it is possible in the Swedish system to move to doctoral education after the first year of master’s studies. The ECTS credits were relatively easy to implement in Sweden. The old national higher education credit scheme stipulated that one week’s

132

International Perspectives on Higher Education

full-time study, including both lectures and students’ self-directed study, was equal to 1 credit. One study-year (i.e. two terms) was equal to 40 credits. The Bologna reform and the introduction of the ECTS system stipulates that 1 credit should equal 25–30 hours of studying (including both lectures and self-directed study) by the average student so that he or she is able to at least obtain a pass mark on the threshold examinations. In this new system, one term equals 30 credits and one study-year equals 60 credits. So, what we did in Sweden, basically, was to multiply the old Swedish credit by a factor of 1.5 in order to obtain the new ECTS credits. For example, a 5-credit course (e.g. Formal Languages at the Department of Computing Science at Umeå University) in the old system was transformed via this simple algorithm into a 7.5-credit course. The hours of actual teaching and the hours of self-directed study by students remained unchanged. The programme and the course syllabi, however, were rewritten and LOs were introduced.

Groups, concepts and criteria are established In 2005, the rector of Umeå University commissioned a special Bologna Project Group. It was tasked with acting as an expert group and coordinating the local implementation of the Bologna reform at the university. This group supported the university management in the drafting of local rules and policies. For example, a timing plan and a set of local definitions of key concepts were produced during the period between October 2005 and February 2006. Regarding the concepts of basic and advanced levels, the Bologna reform meant that all courses had to be categorized into two mutually exclusive groups: basic or advanced courses. Given the autonomy of Sweden’s universities, Umeå University was relatively free to define the meaning of these terms. In 2006, it established definitions that stated that advanced courses are those whose aim, content, instructions and examinations are characterized by extended learning, a higher level of student independence, and a higher level of content complexity. Further, advanced courses are evidenced by a higher level of intellectual maturity and competence, with regard to the subject and/or vocational areas (The Vice-Chancellor’s Office 2006). In 2006, the rector stipulated a set of criteria for determining the content of new master’s level courses at Umeå University. These criteria stipulated that a course at this level cannot be established, unless:



Curricular Design and Assessment

133

1 There is active research and active projects at the University within the subject area. 2 The examiner for the final master’s level essay and the instructor responsible for the course both hold PhDs. 3 The subject can be related to education on the doctoral level. It should be possible for the student to move to a doctoral programme after one year of full-time study. (The Vice-Chancellor’s Office 2006) The first bullet point is an example of what has been recognized as a strengthening of the ‘learning-research-teaching relationship within the Bologna process’ (Geraldo et al. 2010: 88). However, and this is important to note, Umeå University only discusses the research-teaching relationship for advanced-level courses. It is, perhaps, too narrow a perspective, yet scholars suggest that this important research-teaching relationship within the Bologna process is important on all educational levels, including the basic undergraduate curriculum (Geraldo et al. 2010). It is important to reinforce the ‘learning-teaching-research nexus’ (2010: 88) for departments and students at every educational level, not just those who are studying master’s and doctoral level curricula. In summary, the new Higher Education Ordinance came into effect in July 2007. A new set of Bolognacompliant rules and regulations were in full effect at Umeå University after that date. The timetable of events appears in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1 Key Dates and Actions Taken at the Local Level at Umeå University, Sweden, During 2005–2007. June 2005

October 2005

February 2006

February 2006

The Bill entitled “New World – New University” (Government Bill 2004/2005 no. 162) is presented by the Swedish government. It gives a broad overview of the changes in Swedish higher education that will result from the Bologna Process. It is circulated to universities and student bodies at the national level for comment. The rector of Umeå University presents a timing plan for the university’s implementation of the Bologna reform. This strategic document is later revised in April and September 2006. The rector issues an internal memorandum with preliminary local definitions of ‘basic and advanced levels’ ‘learning outcomes’, and ‘progression in higher education’. The rector also issues a template to be used by all university departments to facilitate the rewriting of programme and course syllabi. The Bill comes into effect. It affects the length of many national degrees (the Degree of Master of Science in Engineering, for example, is extended from 4.5 years to 5 years), the syllabi for studyprogrammes and courses, the categorization of courses (basic/ advanced) and the credit system.

134

International Perspectives on Higher Education

February- April 2006

July 2006

September 2006

October 2006

January 2007 July 2007

In all departments at Umeå University: 1  Contact people for the Bologna Process are appointed. Their task is to work internally and externally with the faculty boards in order to spread information and assist colleagues. 2  Based on the template issued by the rector, first drafts are produced for all course syllabi beginning in July 2007 or thereafter. The drafts include LOs. At this stage, all courses that begin in July 2007 or later are categorized into a basic or advanced level. 3  Study programmes are being adapted to the Bologna cycles (3 + 2 + 3 years). The Swedish government makes the draft for the new Higher Education Ordinance available to the public. It becomes effective on 1 July 2007 (Higher Education Ordinance, 2007). At Umeå University, a draft of a new local system of qualifications (local degree ordinance and rules for degrees) based on the Bologna cycles (3 + 2 + 3 years) is prepared and circulated to the faculty boards and local student bodies for comment. At Umeå University: 1  The final versions of the syllabi for all courses offered after July 2007 are determined by the faculty boards. The syllabi include LOs. 2  The final categorization of all courses (basic or advanced) is determined by the Faculty Boards. 3  The rector makes a formal decision regarding which new master’s programmes will be offered after July 2007. 4  The rector determines the new local system of qualifications, which designate local degree ordinances and rules (Umeå University, 2006). 5  A central database is created for all course syllabi. The rector makes small changes and additions to the new local system of qualifications. The new Higher Education Ordinance (Higher Education Ordinance, 2007) comes into full effect. The Bologna Reform is now formally implemented in Sweden.

The university teachers’ perspective So far the events at Umeå University have been discussed on an organizational and bureaucratic level. However, these changes are clearly meaningless unless the teachers, who are going to work with the system daily, are introduced to the reform and given an opportunity to prepare themselves for these new arrangements. Let us shift the focus to the departmental level and the university teachers because it is they, not the ministers, civil servants, and policy-makers, who will implement the reforms on the practical level. Geraldo et al. (2010) remind us that ‘in



Curricular Design and Assessment

135

the end people have to deal with the changes imposed and, above all, are responsible for the success or the failure of the [Bologna] process’ (2010: 87–88). Before the Bologna reform, LOs had not been used to any great extent in Swedish higher education. Most course syllabi described the content of the course and it was common for the initial sentence to read something like, ‘The purpose of this course is to . . .’ and then there would be a bullet list that stated something like, ‘to introduce the concept of X’, ‘to provide knowledge of Y’ or ‘to encourage the student to learn more about Z’. In other words, the text in the syllabi was written from a top-down perspective because it simply told the student what the instructor was going to teach. Following the Bologna reform, this arrangement had to change. A bottom-up perspective had to be introduced so that the syllabi would take the students’ viewpoint and describe what they should know and be able to do after the successful completion of a course. Thus, one task for university management was to educate the instructors and the undergraduate and graduate studies directors about the syllabi changes that are required for each study-programme and course. They had to be familiarized with the concept of LOs per se and receive instruction on how to write them.

Educating the educators: Teacher workshops about LOs In October 2005, the rector at Umeå University decided that the teachers were going to be given a chance to expand their knowledge about LOs through a curricular tool to express educational goals. The task was assigned to the University’s Centre for University Teaching and Learning (UPC). In the spring of 2006, a series of ten one-day workshops was organized for key teaching staff and the directors for undergraduate studies at the university. Each of the workshops was identical and each participant only attended once. Approximately 20 people attended the workshops and the groups were mixed with participants from all faculties, which allowed for discussions across subjects. The aims were twofold. First, the participants would receive the latest information about the ongoing Bologna reform. Second, after the workshop, the participants would be able to: 1 Describe the meaning of the concept of LOs to their colleagues in their respective home departments.

136

International Perspectives on Higher Education

2 Write LOs for course syllabi in their home departments, and describe, to students and colleagues, what they mean. 3 Design assessment situations for sample tests and essays that could be used to measure the knowledge level of each student participating in the course in relation to the LOs at the end of the course. 4 Give examples of how the course instruction could be organized so that the students would be given good possibilities of gaining the levels of knowledge that were described in the LOs. (Centre for Teaching and Learning 2006) At each workshop, the instructors from the Centre for University Teaching and Learning gave a lecture about the concept of LOs. It included a description of the use of rank-ordered lists of levels of knowledge such as Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson et al. 2001). The use of knowledge verbs (e.g. to show, to describe, or to analyse) was also discussed. The current rules and regulations on the national and local levels were also presented and discussed. After this introduction, the participants, who sat in groups of six, presented course syllabi that they had brought with them. Before the workshop, each participant was asked to find two syllabi, one from the basic and advanced levels, from their respective home departments and to bring them to the workshop for discussion. Each group discussed ways to change the course syllabi in order to include LOs and enable them to conform to the requirements of the Bologna Process. The aim was not to produce complete syllabi at the table; rather, the intent was to begin a discussion about ways to change the existing documents and adjust the content to the requirements of the reform. The participants were able to provide anonymous feedback to the workshop organizers and instructors at the end of each workshop. In total, the instructors received 170 notes and these data have been evaluated (Erhardsson 2007), giving valuable feedback to both the educational consultants from the Centre for Teaching and Learning and the University Management. The following is an account of the major results of this process. The evaluation (Erhardsson 2007) reports that the participants in the workshops appreciated the fact that they were asked to bring two course syllabi from their own departments to the workshop. When reading and analysing these old syllabi, they became aware of the fact that there were differences between the described content and the material that was actually taught in the classroom. A lot of good and relevant content was



Curricular Design and Assessment

137

taught in class, but it was not captured in the syllabus description, the participants said. They also noted that the Bologna reform had given them an opportunity to analyse the ways that syllabi were written and the manner in which the teaching and assessment was conducted in their respective departments. Further, the use of a rank-ordered list of levels of knowledge and the use of knowledge verbs was helpful to them. They said that it made it easier for them to analyse the levels of knowledge that were present in their courses and it assisted their efforts to formulate text for their new course syllabus. The main problems that the workshop participants reported were: 1 It was difficult to find the right level (i.e. to know how to write unambiguous LOs without writing descriptions that were too detailed). 2 In terms of using text from the old syllabus when writing the new version, it was difficult to determine how much text should be reused and what parts should be completely rewritten. 3 It was difficult to locate the individual course within the whole studyprogramme. This meant that it was challenging for the participants to write course-specific LOs that were on par with the LOs for the entire study-programme of which the course was a part. 4 Regarding the definition of terms, the participants found it difficult to find consensus regarding certain verbs and phrases. For example, what do terms and phrases such as ‘to problematize’ and to be an ‘active participant in literature seminars’ really mean and how can they be used in the assessment of student performance? (Erhardsson 2007) The following suggestions and recommendations about how to write syllabi with LOs that were given to other academics include: 1 Assign plenty of time for the writing process. Writing a good syllabus is a lengthy process. 2 If it is available, read the programme syllabus first in order to get an overall view before working on the course syllabus. 3 If possible, use the current forms of examinations as a starting point for the writing process. Ask yourself what LOs are measured with these examinations? Are there other ways to measure them? Are these the types of LOs that I want to use in the syllabus? If not, in what ways do I need to write the LOs? 4 Study what other departments do to obtain ideas and inspiration regarding teaching, examinations, and the design of course syllabi.

138

International Perspectives on Higher Education

5 Keep it simple. Writing complex LOs is not necessarily the best method. 6 Be realistic. It should always be possible to assess whether or not the students have reached the objectives, which is not possible if the LOs are too abstract; and 7 Consider course syllabi as living documents. They need to be evaluated, and perhaps rewritten, on a regular basis, especially when they are new. (Erhardsson 2007)

Lessons learned At Umeå University many decisions were made and a lot of work was accomplished during 2005–2007 (Table 6.1). Thus, it is difficult to identify the single best practice regarding the implementation of the reform. However, these seem to be among the most significant lessons that were learned: 1 Whenever possible, retain particular national or local elements. This will help to preserve customs and characteristics of your unique ways of imparting higher education. Chances are, it will also help you to market your institution and your courses internationally. 2 Involve the students, via their local student unions, and listen to their comments and advice. Drafts should be circulated to both faculty boards and student bodies for comment. 3 Appoint a project group that consists of members from all faculties and local student bodies to assist the university management in writing drafts and templates. 4 Make the best of the situation. Use the opportunity to conduct a lot of additional quality-enhancing work while focusing on the Bologna reform. The reform process makes it possible both to rework administrative routines and redesign curricula. 5 Within each department, appoint contact people for the Bologna process. They will work internally to spread information and assist colleagues while simultaneously serving as external representatives. 6 Involve the teachers. It does not matter whether syllabi or degrees will be changed, the transformations are going to be undertaken by people. Hence, it is important to acknowledge the human dimension when successfully implementing reforms. Encourage mixed groups, with academics from different departments and faculties, during Bologna reform workshops. It will lead to discussions and exchanges of ideas across subject boundaries. The experiences from Umeå prove that such can be a great asset.



Curricular Design and Assessment

139

Moving forward The Bologna Process has proceeded since the aforementioned activities at Umeå University occurred. In April 2009, the ministers responsible for higher education in the then 46 countries of the Bologna Process met in Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve to establish the priorities for the EHEA until 2020 (European Commission 2009). They concluded that it is important to continue to establish ‘national qualifications frameworks’ that are ‘based on learning outcomes’ (2009: 2). In the communiqué, the ministers emphasize the importance of student-centred education and ‘the necessity for ongoing curricular reform geared toward the development of learning outcomes’ (2009: 3). The academic leaders are asked to ‘continue to develop learning outcomes and international reference points for a growing number of subject areas’ (2009: 4). These LOs are to be used in all forms of vocational education, including lifelong learning, where qualifications are obtained. Lifelong learning, it was stated, should also be based on national qualifications frameworks and include ‘basic principles and procedures for recognition of prior learning on the basis of learning outcomes’ (2009: 3). It clear that LOs should be used in courses and study-programmes by all higher education institutions and departments who are or aspire to be a part of the EHEA, given that the concept of and the use of LOs is an indispensable part of the ECTS-system – the backbone of EHEA (EACEA/ Eurydice, 2010). LOs are also an indispensible part of the systems for quality control in the EHEA. National qualification frameworks, it is stated, should include ‘the use of generic descriptors based on learning outcomes’ (EACEA/Eurydice 2010: 23). This implies that national qualification frameworks should no longer be ‘input-based’ (i.e. what is being taught) but rather ‘output-based’ (i.e. what should the students know and be able to do), and this new curricula should also compatible with overarching European frameworks. European universities are mature, established institutions that have a number of unchanging customs of teaching, learning and research. Those in Sweden are no exception – Sweden’s first university was founded in Uppsala in 1477. The existence of such valued academic traditions makes it difficult to transform university practices, especially when the changes are as dramatic and complex as those envisaged in the Bologna Process. Hence, it is likely that the reforms enacted at Umeå University, and elsewhere in Sweden, are not the end of the Bologna reforms, or even the beginning of the end of such reforms – they are, perhaps, just the end of the beginning

140

International Perspectives on Higher Education

of the process of building a unified European higher education arena. The success of such reforms ultimately depends on the ability of teachers and other staff within universities to learn from and cooperate with each other, both within and between different nation-states. Thus, in order to help tackle a European Knowledge Economy and work towards possible global templates, university teachers and other staff, like their students, will have to become lifelong learners to be able to understand and address the Bologna Process and whatever follows it. It is hoped that this chapter will help readers in various countries and educational settings to address successfully the challenges of current and future reforms of curricular design and assessment.

References Anderson, L., Krathwohl, D., Airasian, P., Cruikshank, K., Mayer, R., Pintrich, P., et al. (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing. A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Australian Ministry for Education Science and Training (2006) The Bologna Process and Australia: Next Steps. Canberra Bergen Communiqué (2005) The European Higher Education Area: Achieving the Goals. Bergen Berlin Communiqué (2003) Realising the European Higher Education Area Conference Paper available on http:www/bologna-berlin.de/pdf/communiqué/pdf accessed 20th February 2012 —(2005) From Berlin to Bergen Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research Bologna Working Group on Qualifications Frameworks (2005) A Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area. Copenhagen Centre for Teaching and Learning (2006) Welcome to a Workshop on Learning Outcomes. [Internal memorandum,in Swedish.]. Umeå: Umeå University, Sweden Council of Europe (1997) Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications Concerning Higher Education in the European Region. [Lisbon, 11 April 1997.] The European Treaty Series. Lisbon EACEA/Eurydice (2010) Focus on Higher Education in Europe 2010: The Impact of the Bologna Process. EACEA/Eurydice, Brussels Edvardsson Stiwne, E. and Gaio Alves, M. (2010) ‘Higher education and employability of graduates: will Bologna make a difference?’ European Educational Research Journal 9 (1) 32 Erhardsson, M. (2007) Bologna Work Shop, to Meet Across Disciplines. An Analysis of the Unexpected Learning Among University Teachers. [Conference paper, in Swedish.] In The University Education Conference, 27–28 February 2007. Umeå: Umeå University, Sweden European Commission (2009) The Bologna Process 2020, the European Higher Education Area in the New Decade. Communiqué of the Conference of European



Curricular Design and Assessment

141

Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve. Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve European Union (2010) The EU Contribution to the European Higher Education Area. Brussels —(2003a) Trends 2003: Progress Towards the European Higher Education Area. European University Association, Geneve-Brussels —(2003b) Graz Declaration 2003: Forward from Berlin, the Role of the Universities. Brussels European University Association (2010) Trends 2010: A Decade of Change in European Higher Education. Brussels Franke, S. (2005) Make Good Use of the Students’ Interest for International Work. [Editorial, in Swedish.] Nyheter & Debatt, no. 4. [Newsletter for the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education.], Stockholm Geraldo, J. L., Trevitt, C., Carter, S. and Fazey, J. (2010) ‘Rethinking the Research– Teaching Nexus in Undergraduate Education: Spanish Laws Pre- and Post-Bologna’ European Educational Research Journal 9 (1) 81–91 New World: New University (2004) New World: New University. English Summary of Government Bill 2004/2005:162. Stockholm: Swedish Ministry of Education and Research The Vice-Chancellor’s Office (2006) PM with Preliminary Local Definitions of Basic and Advanced Levels, Learning Outcomes and Progression in Higher Education [in Swedish]. Umeå: Umeå University, Sweden Umeå University (2006) Local Degree Ordinance at Umeå University. (Reg. no. 540-3839-06). Umeå: Umeå University, Sweden

Chapter 7

International Experience for Students: The Evansville/Harlaxton Model Gordon Kingsley

Introduction In Chapter 5 Ngwana and Liu dealt in depth with the twin trends in Higher Education of globalization and internationalization. Their intention was to provide a theoretical and critical framework for practice. In Chapter 6 Löfgren continued the theme by looking at the effect of the Bologna process on curriculum in his own university in Sweden, and its implications for Europe generally. Here, the aim is to outline what is hoped to be an example of effective practice in making international experience of Higher Education students come alive. Based on an American/British collaboration, the chapter examines the living history of a specific international experience.

Background Let me begin by saying that this chapter is not scholarship. It is story, private and personal saga-stuff, a signpost at the intersection of individual and institution, pointing the way to a kind of education that changes lives for the better and therefore, perhaps, changes our world for the better, one person at a time. A grand claim, I know. But hear the tale. For the present essay, by being deficient in educational jargon, may therefore seem not serious. It deals with persons not policies, students not movements, experiences not statistics, lives not bureaucracies. It tells of something impractical in the great world of educational policy. Yet that ‘something’ is intensely effective in the smaller (more important?) worlds of individuals and families. A brave editor has included this little essay among its erudite companion chapters. Perhaps it can be an island for you, Dear Reader, maybe a diversion. At best it may be an inspiration that such as this is still possible in



International Experience for Students

143

education, that what brought many of us into the teaching profession in the first place – the love of learning, love of teaching, care for students, even having something to profess – might still be possible. There, that’s said. Now to the story.

Harlaxton Manor At the Grantham edge of the Vale of Belvoir, in the charmingly historic village of Harlaxton, one comes upon an astonishing architectural apparition that appears to be floating between earth and sky, but which in fact is rooted firmly in earthy Lincolnshire clay. It is Harlaxton Manor, a huge construct in golden Ancaster stone that evokes Elizabethan and Jacobean memories in its exterior and wild Baroque fantasies in its lavish interior. It is in fact a Victorian country house, begun in the early 1830s by one Gregory Gregory, Esq, his life’s work and his monument which occupied him until his death in 1855. Anthony Salvin and William Byrne were successively architects of this 150-room edifice, with Gregory himself taking an active role in design and construction. Why did this bachelor need 150 rooms? The scant records are silent. But perhaps the stones themselves speak: in huge stone letters across the front, and in Latin: ‘Gregory Built These Buildings Perfectly.’ He could not have dreamed the good that he and his ‘perfect’ manor house would do. The house took several slants and turns as it passed to members and putative members of the family for a century, then was sold in 1937 to Violet Van der Elst, the eccentric campaigner against capital punishment who christened it ‘Grantham Castle,’ and again in 1948 to the Society of Jesus, who sought to create in its state rooms and halls a centre for the spiritual formation of novices and a retirement home for older priests. In 1965 the Jesuits leased Harlaxton Manor to Stanford University of California, USA, as ‘Stanford in Britain’, the house being thereby thrust into the vanguard of the study abroad movement from colleges and universities in the USA. When Stanford moved to Cliveden (and later to Oxford), the University of Evansville in Indiana, USA, through a series of lease and sales transactions, took over the house and 117 acres, first as ‘Harlaxton Study Centre’ and then as ‘Harlaxton College, the British Campus of the University of Evansville’. The sale price, in 1986 was $180,000. Thrice the house had been threatened with demolition, when its residents could not

144

International Perspectives on Higher Education

afford to keep it up: the sale was therefore a bargain for both the purchaser and the nation. Harlaxton Manor was preserved and put to worthy use.

Harlaxton Manor as an American college Under Stanford University’s stewardship and in the early years of Evansville’s operations, Harlaxton functioned with a typical American university structure transplanted to English soil. The fundamental outlines of this structure remain today: Harlaxton remains an American college. Students came from several of the United States. Their costs – and studying abroad in a developed country is by nature expensive – were borne by themselves and their families, though support from generous private and public funds, through grants and loans, were (and are) the rule rather than the exception. Each student read and was examined course by course (‘module’ by ‘module’) in a variety of fields rather than in a single subject, each course carrying academic ‘hours’ or ‘credits’. The credits earned at Harlaxton were part of a four-year accumulation for each student, each pursuing a distinctive pattern of coursework; when those accumulated credits reached a specified number and included a specified set of requirements, the student received a baccalaureate degree. Work at Harlaxton was therefore part of a degree programme; it was not a ‘gap year.’ Their ‘professors’ were both American and British. From the beginning, the American students used weekends, during their semester or year of study, for extensive travel, either on Collegesponsored trips or independent journeys – initially in Britain, during the early backpacking years, and then as transport became more varied and accessible (it has been more than 40 years) across Europe and into North Africa and the Middle East. In the 1970s and 1980s, the ‘market’ for Harlaxton students reached across the seas to embrace not only the children of American diplomats and military personnel but also students from Europe and especially from countries of the Eastern Mediterranean and Gulf states. These students would typically spend one or two years at Harlaxton and then ‘transfer’ to Evansville or another American campus to complete their studies. (These were days of fewer universities, of course, with more traditional and rigid boundaries to their activities, and with little or no reliance on remote campuses or ‘distance learning’.) As the world scene changed, so did the Harlaxton clientele and programme, so that by 1990 the College was again serving students from the USA almost exclusively and was focusing



International Experience for Students

145

its energies on achieving even higher levels of academic performance. At this point, the ‘Evansville/Harlaxton Model’ of international experience began to assume its present configuration, one that has been in process of assessment and improvement for more than two decades.

The Evansville/Harlaxton model of learning Most elements of the Evansville/Harlaxton model are common to virtually all overseas study programmes: there are faculty and students, teaching and learning, classrooms and travel, experiences of a new country and culture. What is distinctive at Harlaxton is the way these elements are put together, the carefully planned and intentional blending of parts to achieve a total effect. Context makes this possible. All students live in Harlaxton Manor itself, as do most faculty and the administrators most engaged with students. The college is small – 125 to 175 students each semester – and so communication (both formal and informal) is immediately received and immediately shared. Students don’t own automobiles: the beneficent educational effect of this simple fact among a population of American students who would typically have begun driving at age 16, many of them owning cars by 17 or 18, is surprisingly important in achieving an educational focus. Students do not rush away from school to part-time jobs, as is common in the USA. They are not commuting to and from home, or going home for weekends – also a common practice in their own colleges and universities. Living quarters are not dispersed through a city or a campus-city, for students or faculty. Students are not in campus social fraternities or sororities, organizations which can take huge amounts of a student’s time and create huge peer pressures not always positive; nor are they participating in the kinds of university athletic teams or music organizations or theatrical companies that can be equally time-consuming by dint of their ‘professionalism’. Most students are stepping away (by 3,000 to 5,000 miles) from direct parental involvement in their lives, which liberates them in many ways and fosters independence of thought and action. To a remarkable degree, students in this situation and setting are free to learn and open to learning. Working with and within this context, Harlaxton educators have created a programme which deliberately, intentionally integrates the study of British and European culture with experience of Britain and Europe with immersion in British community and family life – done in carefully-planned ways that characterize good educational practice – so that the cumulative effect is

146

International Perspectives on Higher Education

remarkably significant in the lives of students and, indeed, the lives of visiting faculty members from the USA. We can measure this only anecdotally and not statistically, but our very clear sense as seasoned educators is that this integrating of learning and experience, all in the context of an educational focus and an environment of a positive kind of ‘strangeness or ‘stranger-ness’, affects students geometrically rather than merely additively. ‘Harlaxton changed my life’ is a consistent refrain. Students attest to becoming more informed, more open, more independent, more flexible and resourceful, more confident – that is more ‘educated’ – during their time in this programme. This integrated learning is directed towards developing ‘global citizenship’ or ‘global responsibility’ in our students, and our assessments show clear movement in this direction. Again, there is nothing new here in the parts, the pieces, the elements. The difference is in the way these elements are put together and brought to bear directly on the student experience. It is far too much to say that any of us can use the colours of a Picasso or Monet and that only the final configuration is the masterpiece, but the clumsy example is instructive. Harlaxton College, by virtue of its unique context and its intentional formulation of a distinctive programme for American undergraduates, achieves what few others achieve – a little masterpiece of educational effect.

Study: Academic book-learning of British (and European) culture It is so remarkably simple an idea that one wonders why it is somewhat rare, but the key distinctive of the Harlaxton College academic programme, of the Evansville/Harlaxton Model, is that all students are studying the culture in which they are for a time living. Not just casually studying it, if the right subjects happen to be offered at the right time and in the right order. But deliberately and intensely, with all students and most faculty involved and engaged. It works like this: all students at Harlaxton College are required to take half their academic work in an interdisciplinary course in ‘The British Identity: From the Celts to the Present Day’. This course is created, revised and continuously renewed by a team of highly effective, energetic British professors-in-residence. Taught on a classical collegiate model, the course features a blend of large-group lectures and small-group seminars. On Monday and Wednesday mornings the entire college gathers in the Long Gallery of Harlaxton Manor for lectures on such subjects as ‘Britain before



International Experience for Students

147

the Norman Conquest’, ‘England, Normandy and the Angevin Empire’, ‘The Reformation and the Rise of Protestant Nationalism’, ‘The Tudor State’, ‘Britain and Victorian Imperialism’, ‘Britain and the First World War’, ‘Forging the Nation’. (It is evident from these topics that even from the earliest days, well before the European Union, a study of Britain means also a study of Europe.) Small-group seminars come after each lecture, featuring active and participatory learning based on primary sources: Magna Carta, The Canterbury Tales, paintings of Tudor rulers, Shakespeare’s Henry IV Part I, the music of William Byrd – and the Beatles, writings by John Locke, documents from the Home Front during World War II, and the like. Then, as an extension of the classroom, students travel – together with their tutors – to sites that feature in their readings. It is important, in the Evansville/Harlaxton Model, that students see and experience what they are studying. The entire college therefore goes on field trips to Lincoln Cathedral and castle, and the Roman remains in that marvellous city; to Tattershall Castle or to Irnham Hall (to view the replica of the Luttrell Psalter in the local village church); to Peterborough Cathedral; to Burghley House; to St Paul’s in London; to Southwell Workhouse; to the National Gallery and National Portrait Gallery. These are ‘outings’, to be sure, but they have clear objectives. British faculty lead these journeys, instructing students ‘on the road’ and expecting thoughtful reflection on the experiences. Students even ‘take a field trip’ to Harlaxton Manor, where they are living – studying it not as their own domicile but as it would have been when functioning as a Victorian country house. It is a very clever and very useful exercise in seeing the familiar through new lenses, thereby opening minds and vistas. Traditional academic research and writing are paramount in this course, with research papers and essay examinations requiring the synthesizing of course materials into patterns of meaning. The rubric is ‘Reading, Thinking, and Writing – in that order’. (Every faculty member in the world has cringed at reading student writing not preceded by a certain level of reading and thinking.) The Harlaxton library and computer labs are open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Again the goal of this learning community is clearly stated: ‘Our library never closes, and our minds never close. All of us are learning, all the time.’ To symbolize this in a quizzical but memorable way for students coming from America to the UK, most for the first time, the college has adopted and adapted the ubiquitous red ‘L’ of the UK’s learner-drivers – a symbol not so used in America – with the legend ‘Harlaxton College – Learning: All Together’ (Figure 7.1).

148

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Harlaxton College

L

Learning: All Together Figure 7.1  Learning: All Together

The legend suggests: (i) the integration of learning at Harlaxton; (ii) the commitment to learning by all parties and parts of the College; and (iii) the determination that learning never stop and never ends. As the students say, ‘it is 24/7’, for a lifetime. In addition to the required British Studies, Harlaxton students choose from offerings by either British or visiting American instructors, the latter coming from the home University of Evansville and, on a kind of rotation, from 22 partner colleges and universities in the USA. These classes are elected from a variety of academic disciplines, which vary by semester according to the visiting faculty members in residence: Literature, History, Music, Art, Mathematics, Psychology, Business, Theatre and other options, even such things as Nursing and Engineering. American faculty members are asked to relate their classes directly to the British environment and to connect their own teaching, where possible, with information or experiences from the core British Studies course. The American students are therefore taking ‘a full load’ of studies while at Harlaxton and, as stated earlier, are advancing towards completion of their baccalaureate degrees. Again, all of this is very common-sensical, but it is remarkable how many overseas programmes fail to do this simple thing that academics do best: to study the culture at hand.

Engagement: The experience of British (and European) cultures Experiential learning, as noted above, is an integral part of the Evansville/ Harlaxton Model of an international experience for students. The classroom and lecture hall dominate Monday through Thursday in the Harlaxton



International Experience for Students

149

calendar. From Thursday through Sunday nights, and on just about any evening by choice, students and faculty engage in direct experience of local, British and European cultures. From the student perspective, travel heads the list of ways to engage the cultures around them. In addition to the British Studies field trips noted above, Harlaxton organizes optional travel programmes each weekend of the semester, throughout the UK (London, Oxford, Cambridge, Stratfordupon-Avon, Bath, Stonehenge, York, Edinburgh, the Lake District, Wales, Birmingham) and abroad (Ireland, Paris, Rome, Florence, Venice). These college-organized trips include briefings which link to the core British Studies course and prepare students to connect their travels to their studies. College faculty or staff members lead each trip, and students are free and encouraged to engage and manage their experiences of the culture at hand. As they grow in confidence (and some from the beginning), students carry out their own self-directed travel, on their own. Harlaxton offers resources (seminars, print materials, dedicated computers) to help students plan this independent cultural engagement. Harlaxton faculty and staff are not so naive as to think that our students are visiting, say, Barcelona or Paris in a pure quest for academic or personal enlightenment. But we also know that, as with the Grand Tours of another era, much learning is taking place through the experiences encountered. If we help them make connections between what they study and what they see and feel, then their academic as well as their personal growth is intensified. The same can be said for the host programme conducted by families in towns and villages near Harlaxton Manor. For nearly 30 years families have invited Harlaxton students into their homes for meals, for trips to theatre or musical or sporting events, for outings to places of local interest, for quiet evenings of conversation in a local pub. In turn, Harlaxton students invite their British ‘parents’ to ‘their home’, Harlaxton Manor, for meals and events which the college lays on to host our ‘Meet a Family’ participants (the ‘Harlaxton 4th of July’ being the most iconic and the ‘Harlaxton Family Christmas’ being the most beautiful of such events). Lifelong relationships are often formed. This is most assuredly a superb grassroots programme in international understanding. But the college does not let it end there, for Harlaxton College is first and last a place of learning: seminar discussions are therefore formed to help students understand and process the differences they discern in British and American family life, domestic architecture, social customs, educational systems, health care, government, churches and worship, the world of work, taxation, bureaucracies, employment practices, the rearing of children – facets of British life that they observe in or discuss with their host families.

150

International Perspectives on Higher Education

In like endeavour, the college invites articulate individuals from all strata of British society to meet with groups of 10 or 12 Harlaxton students and speak informally about their lives and work. Local British people have been most generous with their time and life-knowledge. From vicar to accountant, from headmaster to duchess, from banker to landholder, from MP to actor (same profession?), from auctioneer to farmer, members of the community have been willing to participate in this informal but most important education of students from the USA. Again, the Harlaxton faculty and staff help students link these conversations with specific elements in their academic study of British history, life, and culture. On a somewhat more formal basis, individuals and groups come to Harlaxton College semester by semester to present lectures or cultural presentations. Recent semesters featured such as ‘The Foresters Morris and Sword Dancers and the Greenwood Clog Dancers’, a curator from the Tower of London lecturing on ‘Conveying History at the Tower’, distinguished British and Irish writers reading from their works, a lecturer from the University of Leicester on ‘Comfort and Convenience in the English Country House’, a French university lecturer on ‘A Cultural/Historical Explanation of the Recent Financial Crisis’, Maypole Dancers from a local primary school, a lecturer from the University of Lincoln on ‘The Most Famous Outlaw, Hereward’. These presentations tend to arise out of, and to be discussed in, the context of the required British Studies course, again seeking integration of study and experience. It is important to note, once again, that these kinds of activities are possible because of Harlaxton’s creating a carefully-planned programme that operates in an attractive and settled space, where students and faculty are in residence together. Because Harlaxton Manor is an historic and imposing ‘there’, it is possible for students to go out from ‘there’ and to invite families and guests to come in to an attractive ‘there’ in a programme that has educational coherence and focus. Much different, it is, from trying to round up instructors and learners dispersed through various locations and schedules and herd them into some kind of common and shared learning. And ‘go out’ the students do, not only in their travels but in engagement with their local community. Many are involved in local churches, Americans still being a church-going people. Athletic teams – the Harlaxton Lions – compete not too successfully with local teams carrying names like the Lincoln Lightning or Grantham Outlaws or Sleaford Storm. Students volunteer in the community – at hospices and retirement homes, with Girl Guides, with disabled or disadvantaged children, with environmental



International Experience for Students

151

groups. In classes and arranged activities, students go to industrial venues, criminal courts, backstage in theatres and backroom in galleries, to hospitals, historical sites, archaeological digs, sports venues (meeting players and management). A carefully-planned set of activities that connect academic study of British history, life, and culture with important manifestations thereof that students can experience firsthand: this is a fundamental dimension of the Harlaxton/Evansville Model of an international experience for students. What we have found, to our great pleasure and satisfaction, is that these carefully-planned activities spill over into spontaneous, unplanned, and even messy sets of relationships and experiences that augment and enhance student learning. The good multiplies.

Immersion: Living in the heart of Britain Thus far, this description of the Harlaxton/Evansville Model has spoken of active learning – a core course of interdisciplinary study in British life and culture, activities that engage British life and culture in deliberate and planned ways – of things our College does, things our students do. But now to what simply is. By virtue of living in Harlaxton Manor, students and faculty members are surrounded by much that is and has been ‘British’, every moment of every day. ‘British’ therefore cannot help but become part of their thinking and living, unconsciously (subversively?) entering American psyches and emerging with a British accent. The excellent Harlaxton faculty and staff, therefore, though taking legitimate pride in the way they conduct teaching and pastoral care, nevertheless yield place at the end of the day to the house itself as ‘our best teacher’. Harlaxton Manor, as noted above, is an astonishing creation, among the finest stately homes remaining in the UK. It is interesting in itself, but its glory is in its use, its purpose: it is not just an artefact or museum, but a living place of teaching and learning, of growth in international understanding and global responsibility. Students learn as they walk through the magnificent state rooms or the utilitarian serving corridors of the manor house or as they lay their heads to rest in sleeping rooms of manor or carriage house down a woodland lane. In their normal daily peregrinations, they look on form and structure; they see artistic embellishment in marble and wood, in glass and plaster and stone; they ponder the lives of people who lived there, the economy which supported those lives, the

152

International Perspectives on Higher Education

changing social structures that caused a change in residents and lifestyles. They read of Gregory’s passion to build such a house and, with help from their tutors, see the unintended and unimagined good he wrought by creating a monumental home of lasting beauty: it becomes their home, and the great house has a role in creating their lives and our future. Certain residents of Harlaxton Manor were heroes in World War I and World War II. Another resident campaigned for social justice. Others were soldiers and scholars of the church. Still others have gone on to become leading scholars in today’s British and American universities. The stories of former residents merge with the stories of current Harlaxton students and faculty, and the latter begin to see themselves as part of a noble procession. Their lives take on added context and meaning. Mystical? Of course. Yet very real. For the American students, it does not stop with the house. A Roman villa was located on a nearby farm, and many generations of Harlaxton students helped excavate an archaeological site at Sapperton; Harlaxton village was part of the Danelaw and bears a partially-Saxon name; the village church dates to 1170; the original Harlaxton Manor may have derived from a hunting lodge owned or visited by John of Gaunt, England’s ‘uncrowned king’ and patron of John Wycliffe and Geoffrey Chaucer. Students converse with Harlaxton staff, all of whom (save the visiting American professors) are British. They jog or cycle through the pastoral landscapes around Harlaxton Manor, scenes straight out of English paintings, or along the Grantham-Nottingham Canal (built just as their nation was being formed in the late 1700s). They speak with British persons riding their horses through the village or walking their dogs in the parklands of the Manor. They find snowdrops or bluebells in Harlaxton Woods, or discover an abandoned World War II airbase out back, learning that ill-fated paratroopers of Arnhem’s sad days went out from the rooms they are now inhabiting – of every five young men who went out, one came back. They host British schoolchildren from the local primary school with ‘children’s theatre’ performances. They hear the Melton Band (formerly the Melton Mowbray Brass Band) play ‘God Save the Queen’ and ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ at the Harlaxton 4th of July garden party for staff and community members, comparing and feeling the meaning of patriotism. They see the British and American flags flying from the front of Harlaxton Manor, their house. All of this not only teaches overtly, but infuses covertly, shaping the lives of American student and faculty residents with a sense of the continuity between British and American values, traditions, histories, and institutions.



International Experience for Students

153

All of the needed support systems for a modern college have been built into Harlaxton Manor – this, too, is part of the Evansville/Harlaxton Model of an international experience for students. A staffed clinic looks after their health, high-speed wireless access extends through buildings and adjacent grounds, a biology/chemistry lab is tucked into a courtyard, computer labs and laptop connectivity are at hand, a sports hall with excellent fitness equipment is hidden in the woods so it will not detract from the Grade I Listed manor house, a well-stocked library is augmented by relationships with the British Library and area university libraries. But these modern amenities are like the service elements in the Victorian country house that Harlaxton was – they tend to be ‘invisible’, the utilitarian not taking primacy but keeping a proper place in service to the higher goals of teaching and learning. Harlaxton Manor therefore teaches students, not only in carefully planned programmes of learning through studies and experience and community engagement, but also in unprogrammed, incompletely-defined, yet very important ways. American students and faculty gain a sense of proportion, a feeling for history, an understanding of the power resident in a passionate calling, an appreciation for beauty – all of these educational ‘commodities’ consumed, mostly unconsciously, along with the conscious pursuits of their class work and the conscious indulging in Brussels sprouts and roast potatoes with their roast beef and Yorkshire pudding on a Sunday night in the Refectory.

The Harlaxton experience This, then, is the essence of what has been called ‘The Harlaxton Experience’, from the earliest days of Harlaxton Manor as a college under the successive stewardship of Stanford University in 1965 followed by the University of Evansville in 1971: (i) serious and demanding academic study, which for the last 20 years has focused on ‘studying where we live’ – an interdisciplinary study of British history, life, and culture; (ii) an integrating of that traditional study with ‘experiential learning’ through field trips and travel, engagement with local families and community life, and enrichment through experience in the institutions and organizations that enrich a society – arts, sports, history, religion, recreation; and (iii) the pursuit of these endeavours from a ‘home’ that is itself a great teacher, albeit subliminally and at levels where the deepest and most substantial learning often occurs.

154

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Much of this is planned, the work of educators who have laboured to create and to refine a way of integrated, total learning for nearly half a century; much of it is beyond planning, deeper than planning, touching not just head but heart, not just the accumulation of knowledge but the wellsprings of being. That is perhaps why generations of Harlaxton students, who have performed well on assessments of increased knowledge, who have grown in global awareness and responsibility, will often offer independently of one another the same one-sentence summary: not ‘Harlaxton taught me a lot’, nor ‘Harlaxton helped me grow’, but rather ‘Harlaxton changed my life’. Can this kind of education be widely replicated? Yes, if the will exists. Will it be widely replicated? No, for it will be rightly seen as ‘impractical’ and ‘inefficient’. Yet as long as there remains a longing for completeness in the human mind and spirit, and a yearning for leaders of intelligence, moral commitment and generosity, there will remain the desire for persons and programmes and places, however small, that can nurture those qualities, and there will be places like Harlaxton College. Note Along the way, Harlaxton Manor was home to a trench warfare school and the Harlaxton Aerodrome in World War I, and then a unit of the 1st British Airborne Division in World War II.

Part 3

Learning and Teaching

Chapter 8

The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited Christina Hughes and Malcolm Tight

Introduction In this chapter we return to an analysis we put together in the mid-1990s, and which was published as an article entitled The Myth of the Learning Society (Hughes and Tight 1995). The topicality of this article and its central argument attracted a published response (Strain and Field 1997), and was itself re-printed as part of an edited collection (Hughes and Tight 1998). Our purpose in this chapter is to re-assess the analysis we made, and discuss how well the concept of the learning society stands up today. We begin by summarizing our original analysis and consider the critiques it attracted. We then discuss more recent debate about the learning society and related areas. In doing so, we focus particularly on the knowledge economy as a policy focus that has superseded that of the learning society. In the conclusion we consider whether the knowledge economy captures the public imagination in the way that the learning society did, and what this concept means for the future of higher education.

The myth of the learning society The original article (Hughes and Tight 1995) started from the recognition of ‘the learning society’ as a key concept in contemporary educational policy discourses circulating at that time. In choosing to analyse it as a myth, we were not seeking to straightforwardly dismiss the learning society as a fabrication or untruth, but we did want to explore how such ideas are constructed and what it is about them that can lead to many, politicians and educators alike, being keen to sign up to them. Myths are forms of storying which circulate in everyday life. At one level we can understand them as discursive formations which, as strings

158

International Perspectives on Higher Education

of language, are always changing and are internally diverse (Hughes 2002). However, for an idea to become a mythology suggests something more than this. It suggests a popularized investment in the truth of the discourse or narrative such that it carries considerable power. Indeed, whether true or not, the essential component is belief in the central idea of mythological stories. Myths can give rise to both false representations and to unerring beliefs in what are perceived to be self-evident facts. Truth and untruth, therefore, sit as uneasy bedfellows within such an analysis. Our argument was that the study of the learning society as a myth would help us unravel its component narrative structures as it drew in other ideas which can, themselves, be understood in mythical terms. In this regard we argued that, as a myth, the learning society was built on other pre-existing myths or belief systems, most notably those of productivity and change, and of lifelong learning and the learning organization. Each of these myths – respectively ‘that there is a continuing need to increase productivity’; ‘that social, economic and technological changes are accelerating at an increasing rate’; ‘that education, training and learning should be available and engaged in throughout the whole lifespan’; that the most ‘successful organisations will be those which continually involve their members in worthwhile individual and group learning activities’; and, in the learning society myth itself, suggesting ‘the productive involvement of individuals in education throughout their lives, to the benefit of themselves, their employing organisations and society’ (ibid. 291–293) – has considerable face validity or appeal. When, however, they are subjected to more critical scrutiny, each of these myths begins to unravel. Productivity increases in all activities are not apparent, and a great deal of continuity in practices may be seen alongside change. Most people, even in developed nations, are not involved in any formalized structures of lifelong learning, and there is no definitive evidence that self-proclaimed learning organizations are more successful than their counterparts. We concluded that there was no example of anything worthy of the title of a learning society in existence. On the contrary, even in the most developed societies, there remained large proportions of the population with poor educational qualifications, many in ‘low skill/low pay’ jobs and many others unemployed. We queried whether, if the learning society fails as a description, it still had purchase as an aspiration. It was in respect of the aspirational aspects that we received the most critique.



The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited

159

The afterlife of an article Our article certainly appeared to have struck a chord with other academics and commentators concerned with the concept of the learning society. Strain and Field (1997: 153) argued that the aims of the learning society ‘are much broader and more transformative than the more narrowly instrumental and economic ones implied by Hughes and Tight in their paper’. While they acknowledged that ‘The project may indeed come to be subverted, hi-jacked by corporatist, instrumentalist, universalist interests embodied in national governments and globalized financial institutions’, they concluded: democratic conditions still make possible a formative discourse from which much stands to be gained. We should not give up so easily and on such a superficial and limited critique. There is ‘out there’ a real society in which knowledge and other resources are unequally distributed, to a degree that is not only inimical to the fulfilment of individual capacities and freedoms but, arguably, detrimental to the collective survival and development of human society. (1997: 154) The following year, both articles were reprinted as part of a collection edited by Ranson (1998a). Our article was the first contribution to Part 3 of the book, ‘The Critical Debate’, which included three other contributions as well as the response from Strain and Field. At the end, Ranson (1998b) penned ‘a reply to the critics’. In this, while acknowledging that our article provided a ‘helpful challenge’ (1998b: 241), he argued that we failed to acknowledge the complexity of the learning society as an analytical or theoretical construct that comprises empirical propositions, conceptual analysis and normative values. The learning society does presuppose unprecedented change (empirical) and therefore the importance of learning about the meaning of this change (normative) and that solutions to these presuppositions will depend upon the creation of certain institutional conditions (theoretical and evaluative proposition). While the idea of the learning society begins with the world as it is, it proposes reforms that constitute aspirations for individual and collective well-being. (1998b: 242) We do not take issue with the general thrust of the commentary in these critiques, in the terms that, normatively and politically, there remains an

160

International Perspectives on Higher Education

urgent need to develop an inclusive society. Indeed, at the present time, we would note that in the UK ‘five million adults lack functional literacy, the level needed to get by in life and at work’ (Jama and Dugdale 2011: 5). Notions such as those associated with a learning society can, therefore, be important in ideological terms, and in respect of providing a mobilizing force to encourage change and, importantly, investment. However, this does not negate the importance of critically evaluating how such ideas come into being, whether they have any empirical basis in terms of contributing to change, how they capture imaginations and, further, how they drop from view when their time is past.

More recent writing on the learning society Since our article appeared, and was critiqued, writing on the learning society has continued to be produced. Some of this has come from what might be called the adult education tradition (e.g. Istance et al. 2002; Jarvis 2006, 2008), with other writers coming from a more generic education background (e.g. Antikainen 2007; Masschelein et al. 2007; Selwyn et al. 2006). Jarvis (2006, 2008), in particular, has continued his extensive writing on the subject. In the first of the books referred to (Jarvis 2006), he provides an edited collection of articles originally published in the International Journal of Lifelong Education. Tellingly, this is organized in four parts, ‘from adult education . . . to lifelong education . . . and lifelong learning . . . to the learning society and beyond’, though just what might lie beyond is, perhaps understandably, left unclear. In the second book, the last of a trilogy, Jarvis (2008) links the idea of the learning society to late modernity, the information society, ethics, global capitalism, democracy and utopia (see Chapter 5 of this book, where a number of these themes are rehearsed). He views the learning society as emergent: Learning for most people never ceases and herein is one of the great lessons of lifelong learning – we all continue to learn for as long as we live – we never arrive at perfection or the end of time. Our successors will keep on learning and so the learning society will keep on changing – it is an existential phenomenon – but the problem, the uncertainty, is we know not where it is going and we have to rely on ourselves – a people who have so far failed to build successfully a City of Man or a New Jerusalem on earth. (2008: 225)



The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited

161

Not surprisingly, there is also a good deal to be read about the learning society on the internet. Thus, an internet search using popular search engines (Bing, Google) identified three common documents focusing on the learning society among the first ten items. One of these was an article, ‘Learning Society’, on Wikipedia, introduced rather plaintively (but tellingly) with the statement: ‘This article is an orphan, as few or no other articles link to it.’ A second (Smith 2000) was an article in The Encyclopedia of Informal Education; and the third was a report commissioned by Cisco Systems (2010). While the first of these documents referred to our original article, and the second referred to the article that comprised the response by Strain and Field and the Ranson collection, the third item referred to none of these but referenced an extensive, mainly American, literature. The Wikipedia article is largely a synopsis of others’ thinking on the learning society, referring to many of the same sources that we did in our original article. Printed out it is only six pages in length. It identifies four main characteristics of a learning society: its futuristic tendency and reliance on new technologies; its focus on the societal level; a requirement for reflexivity; and its location in the global market where education is another commodity. It then outlines policy developments and criticisms of the concept, noting its rather slippery nature. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education article is similar in length to the Wikipedia one, and covers much the same territory. With a focus on the theory and rhetoric of the learning society, much of it is a summary of the thinking of key authors, including Schon, Hutchins, Husen, Boshier and Edwards. The article concludes that: ‘The notion of the learning society may have some theoretical and analytical potential – but it does require considerable work if that potential is to be realized.’ The Cisco report is rather more substantial, weighing in at around 40 pages, and naming about 30 Cisco staff who contributed as well as some 20 experts from around the world who were consulted. It is extensively referenced. It starts by arguing that there is a new morality of learning. Whereas in the past, learning was competitive, coercive and paternalistic, the new ethic of learning is collaborative, global and universal. It is collaborative in that learners need to work with each other. It is global in the sense that every society has a contribution to make and a responsibility to each other. And it is universal because every part of a society must invest in learning and participate. (Cisco Systems 2010: 1)

162

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Great emphasis is placed in this report on new understandings and developments, and rhetoric is mercilessly deployed. Nine principles of the learning society are set out, including that it ‘engenders a culture of learning throughout life’, ‘provides the universal infrastructure they [i.e. learners] need to succeed – still physical but increasingly virtual’ and ‘supports systems of continuous innovation and feedback to develop knowledge of what works in which circumstances’ (2010: 21). The report ends with ten recommendations, starting with: The Learning Society needs strong stewardship from a new coalition of governments, businesses, NGOs [non-governmental organisations] and social investors who together bring the legitimacy, innovation and resources that can make it a reality. (2010: 25) While the Cisco report reads not unlike (indeed rather better than) many of the national and international reports that preceded it, from the 1960s onwards, and undoubtedly conveys both an enthusiasm for its subject and a strong sense of purpose, it also – at least so far as the learning society concept is concerned – feels a bit out of its time. For, though people and organizations are still referring to and writing about the learning society, there do not seem to be so many articles, books, reports or policy documents appearing now, and most of these are authored by people coming to the ends of their careers, and who have invested much of their intellectual capital on the concept.

Beyond the learning society to the knowledge economy Our sense is that the learning society concept has served its purpose and has now been left behind as new ideas come to the fore. It has been absorbed by and overtaken by another raft of concepts, typically using combinations of the words knowledge, global, information and international, and as likely to use the term economy as society. Thus, we hear more today about the knowledge society or the information society, and more particularly the knowledge economy – which has been defined ‘prosaically’ by Brinkley (2006: 3) as ‘what you get when firms bring together powerful computers and well-educated minds to create wealth’ – or perhaps the knowledge-based economy or the global knowledge economy. Such a concept becomes important in post-industrial economies where the emphasis is placed on the importance of individuals having high levels of



The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited

163

education coupled with the use of new technologies. This leads to policy development for employment being placed towards ‘jobs linked to the production and utilisation of knowledge rather than physical goods and low level services’ (Purcell and Elias, 2006: 3). Four recent examples of academic writing – all of them edited books – serve to illustrate this trend. Significantly, perhaps, none of the editors work in education departments, but in other academic disciplines, principally but not exclusively in the social sciences. Van Weert and Tatnall (2005) – their edited book, like many others, stems from a conference – focus in particular on the role of information and communication technologies in the knowledge society. Contributions to the book tackle such issues as real-life learning, virtual corporate training systems, knowledge work management, intelligent learning objects, customisation of industrial training and work integrated learning. Harding et al. (2007) take as their theme the university’s role in regional development in the knowledge economy. In their opening chapter, two of the editors discuss ‘glocal’ universities (see also Marginson and Rhoades 2002) – ‘an alternative, and apparently paradoxical, “take” on globalizing processes: that they are associated as much with “regionalization” or “localization” as they are with global forms of action or organization’ (Scott and Harding 2007: 5) – and the notion of universities as spatial knowledge factories. The contributors to their volume discuss issues and strategies such as technology transfer, cluster promotion, social embeddedness and the role of academics in the knowledge economy. Walby et al. (2007) are concerned with the role of gender in understanding the knowledge economy. Walby starts her opening chapter with the assertion: ‘The knowledge economy is the future of the world of work. Its gendering is central to understanding the nature of its associated employment practices and its implications for the quality of working life’ (2007: 3). The other contributors – from the USA, UK, Germany and Japan – discuss topics such as comparative livelihood security systems, living and working patterns and who gets to be a knowledge worker? Jessop et al. (2008) focus on Europe, and the impact of the knowledgebased economy on education, which they see as ripe for trans-disciplinary or post-disciplinary analysis. In the opening chapter, Jessop notes the pressures that these developments are placing on universities: the traditional model of university governance, depicted most famously in the Humboldt model, is being challenged by demands for greater accountability to a multi-tiered state system, all manner of business

164

International Perspectives on Higher Education

interests from small- and medium-sized firms to national and international champions, and, more generally, to the treadmill of competitiveness across a wide range of scales and in relation to an ever-expanding range of economic and extra-economic factors. (2008: 34) Other contributors to the volume focus on topics such as the role of the European Union and the ongoing Bologna Process, many of them making use of critical discourse analysis (aspects of these issues are covered in Chapter 6 of the present text). Thus, Mulderrig (2008) employs this technique to analyse a corpus of 17 white papers on education produced over the last 40 years in the UK. She identifies a progressive refinement of macro policy strategy. This involves a gradual move from preoccupations under the Thatcher government with the ‘here and now’ problems of educational governance following a perceived crisis towards a more future oriented neoliberal vision of economic success with the ‘macro discourse’ of competitiveness under Major. Thus by the early 1990s education’s role in securing economic success appears firmly established. The final stage under Blair is its concretisation in a macro policy ‘plan’: furnish everyone with skills and you kill your economic and social policy birds with one strategic stone. (2008: 167) This interest from researchers outside education departments in the impact of the knowledge economy on education, and higher education in particular, has also been reflected in the work of educational researchers (e.g. Altbach and Knight 2007; Bastalich 2010; Marginson and Rhoades 2002; Ozga et al. 2006). An example of this is the recent book by Marginson et al. (2010). Their concern is with globalization, creativity and the knowledge economy. While this book is not edited, it is demarcated into a series of single-authored chapters rather than co-authored throughout. Like the book by Jarvis (2008) discussed earlier, this is part of a trilogy, in this case the second volume. Marginson (2010) starts the book by asking the reader to ‘imagine a single global knowledge economy in research, higher education and innovation in industry and government’ (2010: 9), something he claims has only recently become possible. Murphy then contributes chapters on the enigma of distance, portal power and thalassic (i.e. sea-based) imagination and the world circumference. Marginson returns to discuss space, mobility and synchrony, making space in higher education, and higher education



The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited

165

as a global field, before Peters rounds off the book with a consideration of the rise of global science, the virtues of openness in higher education, and cultural exchange and study abroad. The variety of institutional, national and trans-national strategies for global higher education are reviewed and critiqued.

A re-assessment Our analysis of the learning society as a myth (Hughes and Tight 1995) rested on a critique of the underlying myths of productivity and change, lifelong learning and the learning organization. Today, we would argue, the rhetoric and debate has moved on, and we are now dealing with the more recent concept of the knowledge economy. The idea of the knowledge economy has many similarities with the learning society, but has a harder edge to it, and is less likely to make the ritualistic genuflections towards the importance of culture, society, community and even spirituality that were associated with discussions of the learning society. Like the learning society, the knowledge economy also rests on underpinning myths. Again, we would identify four of them, though they are somewhat more complex than the original four, with two of them clearly embodying tensions within them. The rather old-fashioned idea of change has been replaced by innovation, the idea that we need to keep coming up with new ideas to market, or at least better ways of doing old things. The notion of productivity has now been surpassed by that of competition (on a global scale of course); but – recognizing that institutions of higher education, like other organizations, would rather have an easier life if they can – this is aligned in tension with collaboration. The icons here are the international league table and the ‘world-class’ university (Mohrman et al. 2008). Lifelong learning has been supplanted by the media which are supposed or expected to deliver it (more cost-effectively of course): the information and communication technologies, most commonly expressed as the acronym ICT. The learning organization does not have such a close analogue in the new quadrivium, with its place being taken by globalization itself; though, as with competition/collaboration, a gloss is applied here, recognizing the continuing importance of localization as well. Like the myths of change, productivity, lifelong learning and the learning organization – associated with the concept of the learning society – these ‘new’ myths of innovation, competition/collaboration, information

166

International Perspectives on Higher Education

and communication technologies and globalisation/localisation may also be subjected to a critique, which leads to a gradual unpicking of the notion of the knowledge economy. We will use two publications to illustrate this critique, a report by Brinkley (2006) produced for the Work Foundation in the UK, and an article by Bastalich (2010) on the Australian higher education context. Thus, on innovation, Bastalich (2010: 855) queries: ‘the naïve view that innovation causes growth and progress . . . not only . . . [is] the link between innovation and national growth . . . implausible, but . . . it is impossible to objectively judge the benefits of new ideas and inventions from a place that is beyond the relativities of culture and history’. Brinkley (2006), in an attempt to better define and thus measure the knowledge economy, uses a definition of the innovating firm as ‘one that has implemented technologically new or significant technologically improved products or processes’ (2006: 23), and finds that ‘innovating firms in the UK represented about 62 per cent of turnover and 54 per cent of total employment. In most other European economies the shares were significantly higher’. While he notes that the definition is undemanding and generous, this does indicate that a large part of the economy is ‘non-innovative’, yet seemingly surviving quite well. On the use and influence of information and communication technologies, Brinkley is more damning, noting that ‘with the partial exception of the USA, there is little sign of an ICT driven improvement in underlying productivity and growth performance’ (2006: 6). On globalization, he argues that this ‘is only one of several influences on economic development and industrial structure in the UK and may not quite deserve the central role that some commentators and policy makers have assumed’ (2006: 9). Both authors are particularly scathing of the claims made for the knowledge economy more generally. Thus, Bastalich (2010: 845) sees this notion rather like we do: ‘notwithstanding the claims of policy makers, “knowledge economy” does not describe a “new” mode of economic production, but a discursive recasting of the relations between ideas and production’. Brinkley (2006), with his focus on measurements, notes that ‘while it may be true that investment in knowledge is growing faster than investment in physical infrastructure in some OECD [Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development] economies, it is not self-evident that this is happening in most economies. In the UK the reverse may be happening



The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited

167

as catch-up investment in the physical infrastructure increases as a share of GDP [gross domestic product]’ (2006: 8). Using a definition of the knowledge-based industries that includes ‘high to medium tech manufacturing, finance, business services, telecommunications, education, health’ (2006: 15), Brinkley estimates that in 2002 these industries accounted for 41 per cent of GDP in the UK, compared to 43 per cent in the USA and Germany, 40 per cent in France, 35 per cent in Italy and 30 per cent in Spain (2006: 16). While, again, this is a fairly generous definition, it does suggest that only a minority of industrial and commercial activity could be said to take place within the knowledge economy. So neither the learning society, nor its successor concept the knowledge economy, stands up to a great deal of critical scrutiny in respect of evidence that would support their claims to providing grounded policy directives for economic or social advancement. Both terms are what might be called aspirational organizing concepts, rather than succinct analyses of what is actually taking place. This is not to say that they do not convey powerful ideas, because clearly they do, nor that these ideas have no importance. Thus, increasing numbers of innovations are taking place and having an impact, information and communication technologies are becoming ubiquitous, and there is greater global connectivity in the economy than formerly. But these are not the only matters of contemporary importance that we need to consider.

Conclusion We will end this chapter by posing, and trying to answer, two questions. First, why have we moved on in our discussions from talking about the learning society to debating instead the knowledge economy? Second, what does this mean for those of us involved in higher education? The answer to the first question requires an analysis of how discourse changes alongside economic, political, social and cultural adjustments. Language both represents and produces society. It builds on established meanings and draws in new concerns. Ideas, once specified, have a certain currency and lifetime, particularly if they are acted upon and are seen to come up short of what was expected. But the thoughts that underlie these ideas – especially if they convey underlying aspirations – can lie around (like zombies) for a very long time. Periodically, they may be recycled to re-enter the debate on policy and practice, and to influence matters anew. Of course, in some cases the differences are important, and this may be so with the learning society and the knowledge economy. One of our

168

International Perspectives on Higher Education

original contentions (Hughes and Tight 1995) – which, as we have seen we were criticised for – was that, while the learning society came dressed up in socio-cultural rags, it was in essence, or at least was being interpreted at policy levels and by ourselves as, an economically driven agenda. If it was possible to misinterpret that agenda in the 1990s, and see some kind of aspirational egalitarian New Labour agenda instead, this is far less easy with the knowledge economy. The replacement of ‘society’ with ‘economy’ evidences a greater confidence in public acceptance of this terminology, and also a sense of fear, or at least heightened concern, about maintaining economic competitiveness and political power in a globalized world. Given, in the UK at least, the notion of the ‘big society’ is now being canvassed, it will be interesting to see how the next mythology for linking education, learning and economy is framed. In terms of the concept of the knowledge economy, at the meta-discursive level there is a distinct difference to both the affective sway of this form of myth making as well as its intended recipients. While the notion of the learning society had an egalitarian edge, the idea of the knowledge economy does not. This term is quite hierarchical in terms of both class and gender, as the policy emphasis is towards sectors of employment that are primarily occupied by highly educated and networked men. Such a policy concern, and the associated meta-narrative, underplays the continuing gendered division of labour associated with domestic and employment responsibilities. Thus, while ‘the achievement of equal opportunities remains a priority for highly qualified young adults of both sexes . . . the attainment of these raises work/life balance as the central issue facing them as individuals and as family members – and constitutes one of the most important social policy issues of “the knowledge society’” (Purcell and Elias, 2006: 1). While this is a global agenda, it is not, therefore, a universal one. So what are the implications for those of us working in, studying in or otherwise involved with higher education? On the face of it, the knowledge economy, seen as a policy much like the learning society before it, might seem to be an unequivocal support for higher education because it places so much emphasis on higher level skills and capabilities. After all, if higher education itself is not seen as part of the knowledge economy, what is? But the various critical assessments of this concept highlight its partiality and its limitations. The implications for policy development require us to consider what kind of higher education we are being asked to provide for future generations. As its terminology indicates, the knowledge economy is primarily concerned with capitalistic expansion or at least survival. In contrast to



The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited

169

the learning society, which, superficially at least, heralded an inclusive agenda, the role for higher education within this economistic focus is to be concerned with the kinds of knowledge that will produce profit. Hence we have experienced the intrusion into the academy over the last few decades of the skills agenda, and more recently of employability. As far as teaching is concerned, this means an increasing focus on the production of ‘oven ready’ graduates able to ‘hit the ground running’ – to use the contemporary jargon – when they move from higher education to work. It also means a focus on those disciplines or subject areas judged to be vocational – e.g. computer science, education, engineering, medicine, nursing, social work and, predominantly, business and management – and usually with close links with particular employers and sectors. The coming requirement on universities to provide detailed data on, for example, employment outcomes by course indicates an ever closer linkage of higher education to the needs of employers. In terms of research, it means a focus on projects liable to lead to worthwhile ‘impact’: to new or improved products, to cost savings in existing practices or to ‘what works’ agendas. It means, as it does with teaching, funding by results, and ever closer links with those in industry or elsewhere who are best placed to exploit the results of research. In terms of understanding the knowledge economy as a myth, we would judge that its partiality, and the level of broader critique that it has been subject to, indicates how it has not been able to capture the hearts and minds of intellectuals in the way that the notion of the learning society did. While the learning society caught the imagination of many in the academy and policy makers, the knowledge economy lacks a concern with the traditionally excluded. It speaks to a discrete audience of policy entrepreneurs and capital. As such, it may contain many elements of a belief system, but it does not constitute a mythology of our time.

References Altbach, P. and Knight, J. (2007) ‘The internationalization of higher education: motivations and realities’ Journal of Studies in International Education, 11 (3–4) 290–305 Antikainen, A. (ed.) (2007) Transforming a Learning Society: The Case of Finland. Bern: Peter Lang, 2nd expanded edition Bastalich, W. (2010) ‘Knowledge economy and research innovation’ Studies in Higher Education, 35 (7) 845–57 Brinkley, I. (2006) Defining the Knowledge Economy London: The Work Foundation, Knowledge Economy Programme Report

170

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Cisco Systems (2010) The Learning Society available on www.cisco.com/web/about/ citizenship/socio-economic/doc/learningsociety_WhitePaper.pdf (accessed 1 June 2011) Harding, A., Scott, A., Laske, S. and Burtscher, C. (eds) (2007) Bright Satanic Mills: Universities, Regional Development and the Knowledge Economy Aldershot: Ashgate Hughes, C. (2002) Women’s Contemporary Lives: Within and Beyond the Mirror London: Routledge Hughes, C. and Tight, M. (1995) ‘The myth of the learning society’ British Journal of Educational Studies 43 (3) 290–304 —(1998) ‘The myth of the learning society’ in Ranson, S. (ed.) Inside the Learning Society London: Cassell pp. 179–88. Istance, D., Schuetze, H., and Schuller, T. (eds) (2002) International Perspectives on Lifelong Learning: From Recurrent Education to the Knowledge Society Buckingham: Open University Press Jama, D. and Dugdale, G. (2011) Literacy: State of the Nation: A Picture of Literacy in the UK Today London: National Literacy Trust. Jarvis, P. ed. (2006) From Adult Education to the Learning Society: 21 Years from the International Journal of Lifelong Education London: Routledge —(2008) Democracy, Lifelong Learning and the Learning Society: Active Citizenship in a Late Modern Age (Lifelong Learning and the Learning Society, Volume 3) London: Routledge Jessop, B., Fairclough, N. and Wodak, R. (eds) (2008) Education and the KnowledgeBased Economy in Europe Rotterdam: Sense Learning Society available on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_society (accessed 1 June 2011, page last modified 12 April 2011) Marginson, S. (2010) ‘Introduction: the protean and the global’ in Marginson, S., Murphy, P., and Peters, M. Global Creation: Space, Mobility and Synchrony in the Age of the Knowledge Economy New York: Peter Lang pp. 1–17 Marginson, S., Murphy, P. and Peters, M. (2010) Global Creation: Space, Mobility and Synchrony in the Age of the Knowledge Economy New York: Peter Lang Marginson, S. and Rhoades, G. (2002) ‘Beyond nation states, markets and systems of higher education: a glonacal agency heuristic’ Higher Education 43, pp. 281–309 Masschelein, J., Simons, M., Brockling, U. and Pongratz, L. (eds) (2007) The Learning Society from the Perspective of Governmentality Malden, MA: Blackwell Mohrman, K., Ma, W. and Baker, D. (2008) ‘The research university in transition: the emerging global model’ Higher Education Policy 21 (1) 5–27 Mulderrig, J. (2008) ‘Using keywords analysis in CDA: evolving discourses of the knowledge economy in education’ in Jessop, B., Fairclough, N., and Wodak, R. (eds) Education and the Knowledge-Based Economy in Europe Rotterdam: Sense pp. 149–69 Ozga, J., Seddon, T. and Popkewitz, T. (eds) (2006) World Yearbook of Education 2006. Education Research and Policy: Steering the Knowledge-Based Economy London: Routledge Purcell, K. and Elias, P. (2006) Achieving Equality in the Knowledge Economy, GeNet Working Paper No. 15, Conference paper: ‘Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the Women and Employment Survey: Changes in Women’s Employment 1980–2005’, Department of Trade and Industry: London (available on http:// www.genet.ac.uk/workpapers/GeNet2006p15.pdf, accessed 26 June 2011)



The Myth of the Learning Society Revisited

171

Ranson, S. (ed.) (1998a) Inside the Learning Society London: Cassell —(1998b) ‘A reply to the critics’ in Ranson, S. (ed.) Inside the Learning Society London: Cassell pp. 241–50 Scott, A. and Harding, A. (2007) ‘Introduction: universities, “relevance” and scale’ in Harding, A., Scott, A., Laske, S. and Burtscher, C. (eds) Bright Satanic Mills: Universities, Regional Development and the Knowledge Economy Aldershot: Ashgate pp. 1–22 Selwyn, N., Gorard, S. and Furlong, J. (2006) Adult Learning in the Digital Age: Information Technology and the Learning Society London: Routledge Smith, M. (2000) The Theory and Rhetoric of the Learning Society. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education available on www.infed.org/lifelonglearning/b-lrnsoc.htm (accessed 1 June 2011, last updated 3/9/09) Strain, M. and Field, J. (1997) On ‘The Myth of the Learning Society’ British Journal of Educational Studies 45 (2) 141–55 Van Weert, T. and Tatnall, A. (eds) (2005) Information and Communication Technologies and Real-Life Learning: New Education for the Knowledge Society New York: Springer Walby, S. (2007) ‘Introduction: theorizing the gendering of the knowledge economy: comparative approaches’ in Walby, S., Gottfried, H., Gottschall, K., and Osawa, M. (eds) Gendering the Knowledge Economy: Comparative Perspectives Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan pp. 3–50 Walby, S., Gottfried, H., Gottschall, K. and Osawa, M. (eds) (2007) Gendering the Knowledge Economy: Comparative Perspectives Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

Chapter 9

Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University Paul Bacsich

Introduction This chapter will examine how and why the ‘Academy’ in the twenty-first century has both deployed e-learning and adapted to the deployment of e-learning by the ‘other’ (including its own students). It will aim to explain why the radical solutions beloved of visionaries have happened rarely and then have mostly failed, and yet how more moderate solutions are emerging that are sustainable and manageable within recognizable paradigms of university governance. The chapter will draw out links from the e-learning phenomenon to wider issues of privatization, internationalization, culture, research and funding. The material is based on studies of the author and his colleagues in this area since his first e-learning study tour (of three weeks) to American universities in 1995. It takes particular advantage of his recent work on the Re.ViCa and CAPITAL projects (http://revica.eurospace.org; http:// www.lrsi.nottingham.ac.uk/capital/) but also from his long experience in many departments of the Open University (OU) and a network of smaller projects and contacts straddling countries as diverse as Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Hong Kong, Kuwait, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Rwanda, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and Thailand – together with the four home nations of the UK (see note 1).

Background I was fortunate in the early 1990s to have had a research position at the OU which gave me time to think deeply about e-learning and to keep in contact with many of the European thinkers in this field. The relatively privileged funding position the OU occupied in these days meant that by the mid-1990s I and most of my colleagues had home computers as well as



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

173

a computer in the office – and the first laptops were beginning to appear. Email was ubiquitous thanks to the wonderful FirstClass bulletin board system (http://www.soctarc.com) we had first installed in 1992 and we spent far too much time far too late at night engaged in what is now called ‘social networking’ – even if our spouses usually called it ‘wasting time’. All of us on EU projects owned mobile phones (and it was many of us, thanks to the good links with EU associations and agencies that the OU had – and still has) even if they were brick-sized and texting had yet to be invented. I well remember phoning my colleague while standing outside a locked door in Brussels when unbeknown to me he was on the other side of the door – in typical so-called modern way I had not bothered finding out how to get to the meeting because I knew I could just phone somebody when I got near. So it is not surprising that many ‘OUies’ are quietly impatient with recent ‘insights’ into digital natives and the net generation (Maton and Kervin 2008). We were a bubble of people ‘living the 21st century’ by the mid-1990s. In fact one can mark the transition of the OU to the premature twenty-first century by three main events in consecutive years. The first was a three-week study tour of the USA that I undertook with a colleague (the late great Professor Robin Mason) in summer 1995 to visit universities and companies engaged in e-learning – soon to be called by us (in fact by the time of EdMedia 1995) ‘virtual universities’. The second was the foundation of the Knowledge Media Institute in 1996 – this was a key part of the OU’s ‘Technology Strategy for Academic Advantage’ set up largely to combat the soon-expected competitive pressure on the OU from global players and UK ‘upstarts’ in distance learning. I can’t exactly remember when the phrase ‘tanks on the lawn’ was first used by the OU VC to refer to said global players but it was in that era. The third was the publication of the Dearing Report (Dearing 1997) which set the basis for the reforms of the university system in the late 1990s, many of which are still ongoing. How impatient we were when Sir Ron Dearing said that ‘change would take a generation’ (http://en.wikipedia.orf/wiki/Ronald_Dearing.Baron Dearing). How we laughed! How close the future looked! But not for the last time the noble Lord-to-be was wiser than us. Some of the changes are only now really happening and not even now across all advanced countries. In this chapter I shall try to maintain a mid-Atlantic perspective – and closer to Europe than North America – but some of my examples will be taken from further afield.

174

International Perspectives on Higher Education

The Academy and its subspecies ‘The Academy’ is a convenient phrase – and conveniently vague. Institutions engaged in higher education have many common features but revel in diversity. A typical four-level construction would be as follows – I shall primarily use UK nomenclature but a similar pattern would be found in much of Europe. 1 The ‘old’ universities, self-defined as leading in research, with a traditional and rather vague governance model, in some cases dating back to mediaeval times. 2 The ‘new’ universities – in the UK set up in 1992 mostly by upgrading the polytechnics, typically set up as private foundations (‘companies limited by guarantee’ in legal terms) but with access to substantial state funding. Several European countries still have a specific subsector of ‘polytechnics’ or ‘universities of applied sciences’ with different oversight and funding arrangements. 3 The ‘university colleges’ – in the UK set up mostly from 2002 onwards – in governance and funding terms similar to new universities but with some restrictions on the kinds of qualifications they can award (for example, inability to award doctorates). Many specialist institutions of art, music, dance and drama are university colleges. 4 The ‘colleges’, mostly oriented on immediate post-secondary education, but an increasing number of which carry out higher education as part (but usually only a small part) of their overall function. The term ‘university’ would not normally cover the fourth tier. In Europe, this divide is not an issue – unlike the USA, there is little concept in most of Europe (with some exceptions such as Scotland) of the ‘community college’ offering a range of further education and higher education functions in an integrated way. However, the above classification ignores some specific ‘modes’ of institution; and it is also a statist view. On the whole, Western governments are not usually particularly concerned with how students are taught. It is assumed that full-time students have a campus to go to – but what they might do there remains a mystery to government (so not only to their parents) – until recently, as the economic pressures mount. In fact we were here before – from the 1970s a movement swept the world to provide a different form of higher education to part-time students, to combine wider access to higher education – open



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

175

education – with a different mode – distance education – believed by governments of the time (as now) to be cheaper. There is a bit of a beauty contest among open universities as to ‘who was first’. More importantly since those thrifty beginnings (some were nearly strangled at birth and others have had regular funding crises) the open universities have matured across the world into powerful and influential institutions key to many governments’ agendas of widening access. Interestingly, with some notable exceptions (India and Spain come to mind) there is rarely more than one open university in a country. We shall return to this phenomenon later. The other weakness in the classification is the absence of the private sector. Private universities – like private schools – operate in many countries, in fact most. There are only a few countries that have mostly held out against them – France and UK come to mind, but things are changing there too. But in many countries they often operate ‘under the radar’ – ministries tend not to bother about them, except to complain – they get left out of official lists, and so on. I should stress that by ‘private’ I do not mean the legal way they are set up – many universities across the world have the governance form of a private institution (even if this alarms some northern Europeans) – but the way they are funded. Private universities do not get direct funding from the state – though in some countries (such as the USA) some students can get public loans to help finance their studies. Note also that many public universities charge fees – and especially high fees to out-of-state students or (in the EU) to non-EU students.

Adventures in e-learning It was around 1999 when in various countries governments got very interested in modern versions of distance learning – but this time the focus was different – not so much on access by disadvantaged groups in the home country, but by advantaged groups in other countries – though not so advantaged (in money or time) that they could actually travel to the home country and study there for some years (this dichotomy being one of the fatal flaws, as it later turned out). The proximate cause appears to have been the Business of Borderless Education report done by UK–Australia teams (http://www.dest.gov.au/archive/highered/eippubs/eip00_3/slpit.htm and http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Document/Borderless Summary.pdf ) but the more strategic reason seems to have been a kind of educational imperialism from the ‘Anglosphere’ allied to a ‘build it

176

International Perspectives on Higher Education

and they will come’ mentality typical of those far-off dot.com days when business plans were little more than a winning smile and catch-phrase, and market research was done too little too late (when the clouds were gathering). The timing is also interesting in that it was a generation (as Dearing had predicted) after the founding of the first open universities. Not surprisingly to some, but annoyingly to others, the open universities usually were seen as too old, tired and traditional to be suitable for this new era, being stuck (or so it was said) in various print- or TV-based paradigms rather than being ‘net-ready’. A paradigmatic example – one of many – was the UK e-University. This was conceived in early 2000 and a number of technical studies and market studies done (using ‘market’ in a charitable way). After some ministry dithering and régime changes the final management team got going in early 2002. I joined in early 2003 but by early 2004 it had come under orders to close, and was wound up by that summer. To quote myself, ‘even by the standards of e-learning burn-outs that was fast’ (Bacsich 2005). There was quiet satisfaction in a number of countries including in Asia that the ‘Brits had messed up’ but the UK e-University was not alone in its meltdown – just that it happened much more publicly that many others due largely to the high hopes for it and the Parliamentary Inquiry that followed (House of Commons Education and Skills Committee 2005). The Hall of Infamy also included several US failures (Fathom, etc.) and Scottish Knowledge (reborn as the Interactive University which then duly failed), Dutch Digital University, Open Learning Agency, TechBC, U21, NetUniversity and many more. Several more just ‘ceased’ or were quietly merged into other entities – sometimes closing down completely was seen as too costly politically or financially. Interestingly and pertinently, several of the much-maligned open universities went on, more slowly but inexorably, to become major players in distance e-learning – including the OU, the Dutch Open University, Athabasca University and University of Maryland University College. ‘We are the e-University now’ said one smug Vice-Chancellor. Also a very few of the ceased/merged ones got a new lease of life in their new form – the Canadians seem to have got the knack of this, at least in British Columbia with both the Open Learning Agency and TechBC eventually doing well in their new forms as Thompson Rivers University and the Surrey Campus of Simon Fraser University – though maybe not in Quebec but that is another story. Complicating factors in a number of these failures were complex consortia and public–private partnerships, the latter a feature of the ‘third way’ politics of the time. Both are best avoided – though there are



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

177

a few examples where consortia work if well managed – Open Universities Australia being a key exemplar.

The IT infrastructure But away from the noughties world of breathy press reports of e-learning gods and heroes ‘striding the world like a colossus’ though often ‘with feet of clay’, more interesting to the Academy are the changes in the situation with e-learning on campus. We begin with the Information Technology environment. Though there are (at least apocryphally) European universities still to complete their master plans for full re-equipment of their classrooms with overhead projectors, the IT situation in much of the Academy has been transformed in recent years across the developed world. This transformation is in fact relatively little to do with e-learning, at least not in a narrow sense, though e-learning (and its enthusiasts) often takes the credit (while, its enemies say, being mysteriously absent when bills are to be paid). It is much more to do with the IT-ization of the world – including the staff and students within it. Students (and we shall return to them later) expect to find a campus with a good range of IT facilities, with desktop computers available in computer labs (increasingly seen as boring) and also (more fashionably) in learning centres – with better décor, nearby coffee facilities and comfier chairs and tables. Depending on the student demographics, many students will bring a laptop with them when they arrive at university – and more and more will want to bring the laptops on campus and connect to the network anywhere on campus – in the lecture theatre, tutorial rooms, library, coffee bars, corridors and even outside (where the climate allows it). Wireless is increasingly the mode of connection as there are too many problems with cabled connections and wireless is nearly as fast. Students will expect the university-supplied IT to include a full range of standard office tools so that they can produce assignments, search the web and do all the other things that students want to do (including social networking). They will also expect to have access to any course-specific software – CAD packages, compilers, simulation tools, symbolic manipulation systems, etc. Staff also expect to each have their own desktop PC (or in some cases laptop) in their office (the office may be shared, but not the PC). Most staff will want a PC at home (which might be their laptop but many staff still

178

International Perspectives on Higher Education

prefer a desktop PC). Even ground-breaking researchers are traditionalists when it comes to offices – business concepts of hot-desking are strongly resisted, often with good reasons. All this costs the university a great deal of money. Worse, in most universities all this has to be paid for without any reduction in the other university costs (rather, increases for staff salaries, staff pensions and non-staff costs). While this equation may have been soluble during the last economic boom, it is now becoming intractable. By and large, the IT departments have done a good and largely unsung job in providing all this. Staff and student users have little idea of what has to go on behind the scenes to provide universal network access and the servers on campus – and the backbone connectivity out to the external services that students and staff increasingly want to access. Wireless access may be cheaper to provide but most campuses (unless built very recently) have already sunk the cost of universal wired access and IT directors tend to groan when the University President comes back from a Presidents’ meeting to say ‘we must have a wireless campus too!’ The IT director also has to supply a range of administrative IT systems. Many of these – for payroll, estates planning, etc – the students will not see. Other systems – for enrolment, module selection, timetabling, etc. – they will see. But the main pedagogic system the students will see is the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). Virtually every university in the developed world now deploys a VLE – in the Anglophone world this is often the commercial system Blackboard (or in some cases Desire2Learn) or the increasingly popular open source system Moodle. In the rest of the world there are other commercial choices but Moodle is very popular too. There has been a lot of talk about the ‘death of the VLE’ but surveys show (and my travels anecdotally confirm it) that the VLE is alive and well – though there is increasing debate as to what subsystems it contains – what about assessment, plagiarism detection and the web 2.0 features such as blogs and wikis? What about email? One service that IT directors are increasingly not offering (via the VLE or otherwise), but outsourcing to the ‘cloud’, is email. Until recently it was mark of pride among IT directors that they ran an excellent email service for students. Increasingly they refer the problem to Microsoft or Google – for students, not for staff (there is a different set of issues for staff email). In some cases they just work with whatever email address the student comes in with – in an era of lifelong learning, a lifelong email address makes sense for students.



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

179

Pedagogy This brings us to pedagogy – and a reopening of the issues not solved by the grand-scale initiatives of the early 2000s. Among e-learning enthusiasts there seems to be a lack of a clear long-term vision and little consensus on preferred directions for the evolution of e-learning. The zealots, most often not actually in universities or, if in them, not closely associated with substantial teaching or management duties, seem to foresee de-institutionalization in an impending era of informal learning. Like the Marxist state, the campus is supposed to wither away – and not only the campus but all the ‘apparatus’ associated with it. The issue I have with all such visions is to foresee the intermediate state – what will the missing link be between ‘now’ and ‘real soon now’ There is in fact a certain amount of more substantial analysis on possible models which was done by consultants in preparation for the UK e-University – it is not much read now as much that was good went down in the debacle along with the bad (Pricewaterhouse Coopers 2000). (Phrases such as ‘navigator’ and ‘unbundling’ are again heard.) This is a pity because similar ideas are again surfacing afresh in more than one country including the UK and New Zealand – in connection with such opposite poles as private providers (how to accredit them) and the OER University (OER University 2011). But politicians, just like research assistants, do not care to read the literature. The mainstreamers foresee e-learning becoming more and more pervasive – ‘there’s already an “e” in learning’, they say (http://www.slidedshare. net/ranihgill/theres-already-an-e-in-learning). The subtext is that they hope e-learning will go away as an issue – and the enthusiasts with it, so that they can stop being pestered about pedagogy. The distance learning optimists imagine that as e-learning becomes more and more pervasive, distance e-learning will somehow lift off from the ‘base metal’ of the campus. Thus a distance teaching university will rise from the carcass of the campus university which will then wither, its true role completed. There is not a shred of experimental evidence that this has ever happened – and it is not a view that most existing management are sympathetic to, for obvious reasons to do with their jobs. Instead, what seems to happen is that e-learning does become pervasive within the on-campus paradigm but there are strong pressures inhibiting further ‘ascension’ (by analogy with http://en.wikipedia.ord/wiki/Ascension) (Stargate)#Ascension). This also applies to distance learning. Somehow, due to following the market or via enthusiasts, or both, a distance education

180

International Perspectives on Higher Education

team comes into existence. It then also starts to grow but counter-forces arise to inhibit its growth as distance learning rises to the attention of senior management once the budget goes above a key threshold. A rule of thumb in the UK about this ‘second-stage ignition problem’ is that when distance learning enrolments rise above 1000, further growth is hard and in fact growth can turn into decline – usually the distance learning director leaves, reviews sap the energy of the team, etc. Other countries manage it better – such as the rest of the Anglosphere (especially the USA and Australia). Yet it is still very hard to evolve a true dual-mode institution where the campus-based and distance learning components are in rough balance and have parity of esteem with senior management. The best known Canadian example, Thompson Rivers University, did not evolve that way, it was created thus (from the fusion of OLA and an existing college whose upgrade to a university had dual-mode as a mandatory condition). In Sweden there are said to be some universities where the rectors worry that they have ‘too much’ distance learning, (http://www.hsv. se). This set of conflicts means that e-learning is still conceived by senior management (on the rare occasions when they think about it) as more in the nature of a problem than a solution. The campus is so comforting, being central to the founding myths of the Academy. These strategic issues are much more important than arguments over pedagogy. In fact from the mid-1990s what I earlier called the ‘tacit pedagogic consensus’ spread across the UK and the USA and then to most of the Western world and other parts that look to the West for educational models (more than often admit they do – see Bacsich et al. 2010). This is sometimes called ‘conservative constructivism’ and has the following features: 1 Content is important but ‘content is not king’. 2 Collaborative working among students is important but they have got to have a starting point and scaffolding. 3 Interaction with the professor is important but there have to be some ground rules especially in the online situation. 4 Interaction online should be mostly asynchronous (what used to be called bulletin boards) as this fits best the busy lives of student and staff. 5 But there are pedagogic occasions and scenarios where synchronization is key. 6 Always add a bit of spice typical of the era (yesterday: blogs, today: podcasts).



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

181

Some of the underlying principles come direct from Chickering and Gamson, as reinterpreted by Ehrmann (Chickering and Ehrmann 1996). (Not many young academics read them now.) There are still many arguments over pedagogy but they are arguments over detail – and tools – and academics love arguments. In many institutions the academic has very little control over the fundamentals of how much they teach and how they teach – but at least they can tweak the details – a wiki here, a podcast there. Blogs and wikis have proved much more intractable in use than earlier enthusiasts imagined – but such issues do not impact much on university management except to increase their worries about reputational risk caused by such systems. Surprisingly to some, podcasting is the new technology that has far greater potential impact on management. Although for years it has been possible to develop audio-visual materials to support learning, the costs of doing this in traditional ways to traditional quality levels are high – and many universities have in fact downsized their audio-visual departments. This is also true of distance teaching universities – which also have their cost pressures. Thus e-learning was in danger of again becoming a silent exercise, in particular putting heavy pressure on student’s reading skills, an issue especially for those who are studying in their second language. Podcasting reverses that. Despite the years of evaluation literature criticizing educational radio and educational television (‘too long’, ‘too linear’, ‘too boring’, etc.), the realization grew that short, fit-for-purpose audio snippets had values of immediacy, warmth and a different mode of discourse. Podcasts can be made by professors for students, or by students for professors as assignments – or by students for students. Podcasts can become the basis of the iTunesU offering for the Academy, especially when made by charismatic professors, leading to enhancement of brand and positive impact on recruitment and on funders. At this point senior management get interested. Of course podcasting is not new in concept – I well remember making cassette tapes for OU students in the 1980s, in the teeth of opposition from the BBC who feared for ‘production values’ (and their jobs – which did go, in time). But the technology and its ease of use has changed out of all recognition with the advent of the MP3 player and iPod in particular. Apparently flying even more in the face of the literature, lecturecasting is sweeping the Academy in the developed world. Many universities have replaced their analogue video recording systems and installed modern digital equipment to record and digitize complete lectures. In my view the case for this is less clear – coming back to ‘why are the students not

182

International Perspectives on Higher Education

in the lecture?’ (There is an old cartoon of the professor’s tape player giving the lecture to a bank of student tape recorders.) But lecturecasting is happening on a large scale. Again convenience and fitness for purpose wins out over educational theory and production values. Students are now customers.

The library and its users In the twenty-first century university, the library is evolving in two ways: 1 Into a learning centre, where students can study singly or in groups using PCs to support their work in a more comfortable and appropriate environment than the serried ranks of desktop PCs typical of computer rooms. This has been already touched upon. 2 Into an electronic library – or more pedantically a hybrid library – with a mix of electronic and physical resources, the balance depending on time, the topic and the user community. The users of the library are also evolving. Whatever the reality of the ‘net generation’ phenomenon, the teens and twenties who form the prime cohort of full-time students are increasingly used to PCs and mobile devices and are reasonably skilled at word processing and browsing (but less skilled than they think and they need to be). This is admittedly much less true of the ‘new majority’ cohort of part-time (including distance learning) students, especially those from less advantaged backgrounds, but of course every year the real ‘old-timers’ are less and less. It always comes as a surprise that most part-time students are youngish adults even though they are adults – with in some cases (as at the OU) a median age in the 30s (Open University 2006). My son and daughter, now in their mid-30s, have grown up with computers since they were young children – first a BBC Micro, then a Mac, then PCs for years. So have many others. Many adults have in fact learned to use computers when they were adult – including many professors. The divide is not as fixed or hard to bridge as naysayers think. But it is there. To their credit, librarians in several countries (the UK, USA, Australia) have been faster than many stakeholders in the Academy to react to the changes in their service function – in their case caused by the rapid digitization of resources and the changes in user skills/behaviour/needs from a library. Even more unusually they have accepted that this implies that the expenditure on the specific ‘library’ functions may well decrease.



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

183

Library 2.0 is ‘a loosely defined model for a modernized form of library service that reflects a transition within the library world in the way that services are delivered to users. The focus is on user-centred change and participation in the creation of content and community. The concept of Library 2.0 borrows from that of Business 2.0 and Web 2.0 and follows some of the same underlying philosophies. This includes online services like the use of OPAC systems and an increased flow of information from the user back to the library’ [Author’s italics] (Chad and Miller 2005) In the UK and elsewhere several studies have been done to put flesh on the bones of the Library 2.0 concept (Adamson et al. 2008). Furthermore, many librarians are experimenting with blogs, wikis and other web 2.0 systems including social networking, to better track and gain feedback from their users. There are even a few innovative Library 2.0 systems in operation. Open source systems like Evergreen (http://open.ils.org) are slowly coming to fruition and beginning to challenge the dominance of the proprietary Library Management System in the university library – which has reigned unchallenged by open source much longer than its sister the proprietary VLE. Librarians do not forget the needs of their users in subjects where it is as yet not possible to provide electronic versions of all relevant material. They would call this being ‘service-oriented’ rather than being ‘conservative’. A recent study for the OU made it clear that many distance learning providers still have to – and take care to – provide a quality service of posted or scanned material to their students at a distance – in the province, in the country and in some cases even internationally.

Internationalization Most universities in the developed world have students from beyond their host country’s borders – on their campuses or attending virtually. Most of these will want to ensure that there is something in their curriculum to attract such students – in other words, to give a more international feel to their curriculum. Universities do not have to be in the Times Higher Top 200 (http:// www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-2011/ top-200.html) to have to worry about internationalization. They do not have to be distance teaching universities to worry about it. They do not have to want to attract US students – or Malaysian or Chinese students – to have to worry about it. It affects more and more universities. The major open universities have been concerned with the issue for at least 15 years.

184

International Perspectives on Higher Education

All of this makes it strange that it still appears to be a relatively new topic in a number of universities. One suspects that a number of universities were proud of their nationally-specific curriculum and saw the occasional foreign student as at best an irritation. But as the numbers of foreign students grew (whether face-to-face or via distance learning) and as universities and governments released that there are no votes lost by charging high fees to foreign students, the picture changed. The good news is that an internationalized curriculum is easier than ever to develop, at least for those universities who teach in one of the world languages, not just English. (But note in passing that teaching in English, for some parts of some courses in some universities, is far more widespread than many governments realize.) This is not because of e-learning – e-learning is one of the causes of internationalization, but not (directly) the cure. However, the same underlying processes that have brought about widespread e-learning have also brought about a widespread multi-language web, which academics are regularly perusing – for example for their own research. While the resources on this web available in English far exceed the resources in any other world language, many more academics can read English well enough to carry out research than have to teach in English.

Research In the early 1980s, even in distance teaching universities the IT systems the academics used for their research were completely different for those that they used (or were forced to use) for teaching. Over the next 30 years there was a slow but steady convergence of systems. This has undoubtedly led to the embedding of e-learning into the university mindset. In the early 1980s, research – or at least the literature search part of the research process – was about reading books and journals – often retrieved after perusing abstracts via a proprietary library search system (often run by the librarians not the academics directly). Teaching was, in distance learning, about writing instructional texts for later printing and perhaps some use of teleconferencing or video conferencing for some ritualised interaction with students. In the campus universities, the overhead projector was king. Some advanced academics used email, students not at all. By the late 1980s, the Apple Mac and Windows PC computers were becoming common in the richer universities – among staff, not among



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

185

many students – except a few adult students engaged in distance learning. Desktop publishing had arrived, with Microsoft Word establishing an early dominance even though MacWrite was beloved by many Mac users including the author. Many more academics used email, although very few senior academic managers and very very few administrators. Some privileged distance learning students from a few universities were using specialized email and bulletin board systems, although often not connected to internet email. Academics (in campus and distance teaching universities) used PowerPoint to produce overhead projection transparencies. Many used Word to produce papers but academics in technical subjects but scientific users often preferred systems such as TeX and TROFF to produce their papers despite their lack of WYSIWYG capability (I suspect some academics relished that lack, separating them from their lesser peers and the students). By the early 1990s, the first uses of bulletin boards for education were well under way, especially with the flowering of the FirstClass system. A few specialists had heard of WWW, but no one had any idea of how pervasive it would be. Energies instead went into populating bulletin boards with content pages and posting out CD-ROMs of content. (At least no one tried to build online courses using Gopher.) A topic crying out for research is whether the fashion of the age for constructivism (which downplays content in favour of interaction) was a cause or a consequence of the content impoverishment of the systems of the time. From time to time over the years a number of people and institutions tried to encourage convergence of systems between academics and students. It did not always work. For example, at the OU, FirstClass became the email system of choice among academics, and its bulletin board system was widely used by academics, not only by students. This certainly helped to form a common mindset. I tried to repeat the experience when in 1997 I brought in FirstClass as the email system for academics at the university I was then at – but I never succeeded in getting the administrators to use it and this tactical defeat led to the strategic result of the university abandoning the system shortly after I left. It was not until the late 1990s – amazingly to the modern reader – that the power of WWW became clear – and it was not until then that the VLE (Blackboard and its ilk) made its appearance. Academics and students rapidly agreed that WWW was a good idea but the VLE was left as a system only for students – and seemingly not one chosen by them. This is the case to this day – and this seems to be one of the reasons why despite its widespread use there are continued papers on the death of the VLE and desires to move to a post-VLE.

186

International Perspectives on Higher Education

The digital projector had become pervasive and academics no longer had to carry around bulky backup copies of overhead transparencies just in case there was no digital projector in the host location. However, there was a new source of stress in that it was by no means infallible to connect one’s laptop to a digital projector. I well remember one dreadful morning in Queensland when just off the plane from Singapore I tried and failed to get the projector to work even though it was from the same manufacturer as my laptop. When an eminent e-learning friend in the audience came to my rescue the results were no better. ‘How many professors of educational technology does it take to change a projector?’ came the irreverent drawl from the back of the room. That’s Australians at their best. By the mid-2000s the convergence was getting even closer. Academics and students were getting used to ‘searching the web’ and Google was beginning its rise to be the dominant search engine. Disappointingly for some in the library community, academics rapidly adopted Google in preference to proprietary library search systems – and in some reports it was suggested that academics had become rather too much like students in their inability to carry out complex searches – even Google Scholar being a bit advanced for them, let alone Boolean searches (Rowlands and Fieldhouse 2007). Later in the decade the use of web 2.0 techniques such as blogs, wikis and podcasts became prevalent with the general public being in most cases ahead, and in the case of wikis (especially with Wikipedia), well ahead of the academics. Only an academic could write an article on ‘how I learned to like Wikipedia’ (Chandler and Gregory 2010). Now in as the early 2010s there is an almost complete convergence. The last major gulf to be closed was the one between the professional social networks (LinkedIn, etc.) and Facebook. But increasingly academics and other professionals are under strong pressure to become Facebook friends with those who IRL are not friends or even close business colleagues. There is strong pressure to do so – social networking reasons and convenience reasons (one less system to have to learn). Except that one can rarely drop out of the old system. There are also many ethical issues – in particular should professors become Facebook friends with students – in their university, in their class? It has been suggested that if they do so, they should do so via clones – alter egos. But that has its own dangers and would be no defence if it came to lawsuits. I said ‘almost complete convergence’. Except for the VLE. There have been attempts, even well-funded ones to develop and promote suitable VLEs for researchers (VREs) but without great adoption (http://www. jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/vre.aspx). This does raise continuing



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

187

questions as to how sustainable the VLE is in the twenty-first century university. But it is easier to theorize about doing it than doing it – no VLE based on Facebook, Google, etc. has been at all compelling. So ‘don’t buck the market!’ – but what to do if the market does not deliver what you want?

The marketplace Which brings us neatly to the marketplace – or marketspace as some would call it. What has e-learning done to the market for higher education? Basically, competition is much greater. First, despite the various failures of e-universities in the last ten years, distance e-learning has now substantially increased the ‘reach’ of many universities, including many who were not originally open universities or even largely focused on distance learning. While we are some way from the ‘free market in global distance learning’ envisaged by some GATT theorists (http://www.wto.org/English/tratop_e/serv_e/education_e/ education_e.htm ), more and more universities take a higher and higher percentage of their students from outside the home nation and outside the home continent. This is happening not only in the Anglophone community but also in some other world language communities. It is clear that it occurs in the Hispanophone community (UNED, UOC, etc.) and in the Arabic-speaking community (e.g. the Arab Open University operating across seven countries) and to a lesser extent in the Dutch-speaking community (OUNL). It has happened for some years in the Chinese-speaking community although one might have to consult a politician to determine whether the situation of mainland China students studying virtually at a Hong Kong university is international or not (Taiwan seems less interested in distance learning). There is much less information about the Lusophone community although general considerations would support it – as they would in the Russophone community. The situation with the Francophone community seems also not well documented. It is likely that only in the Anglophone community is there substantial studying by students at a distance not in their first language. Again, information is scanty. Admittedly there still are some restrictions on these flows even within linguistic regions. For example, UK universities have made only very limited inroads into North America (for cultural reasons – the USOU subsidiary of the OU was a failure, perhaps done too soon) or South America (linguistic reasons – though there are a few exceptions) – but

188

International Perspectives on Higher Education

done rather better (relatively speaking) in the Caribbean. The counterflow of UK students studying remotely at North American providers seems similarly small, for reasons that are less clear (oligopolistic role of OU?) What is clear is that this is happening without changing the fundamental characters of the universities involved. It has also been happening during a period of both strong government pressures in many Western countries on universities to expand their foreign student face-to-face enrolments, and historically low air fares across the world. Under the impact of stricter visa restrictions and rising oil prices (due essentially to long-term scarcity) these conditions are no longer valid and are unlikely to return for some years if ever. Electric planes? I think not. Second, many campus universities have substantially expanded their catchment areas (the locations from where students travel to study) for so-called face-to-face students, under pressure to expand enrolments, but facilitated overtly or covertly by e-learning (usually covertly). Basically, techniques like lecture capture, web-based resources and use of online interaction allow students to choose more carefully when they will actually make the investment to travel to the campus – although it is usually only for part-time courses (and not always then) that universities do any actual planning of which days/hours courses are offered on and why. This means that catchment areas are more overlapping. It is worth noting – especially to those that resist the ‘Anglo Saxon’ approach in language and concepts – that this market is not dependent on universities levying fees. The competition can be for the quotas (and associated funding) from the ministry. Thus even in countries with nil fees (such as Sweden) there is intense competition for students. Student demand for places is one of the levers that universities deploy to influence ministries.

Funding Across the world, the concept of free higher education is in peril. As the years go by, fewer and fewer countries offer free higher education even to their own citizens. Even in Europe the trend is clear, but slow (http:// ec.europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/education/university/fees/index_ en.htm). A rather faster trend is that institutions are increasingly charging full-cost fees to non-EU students and can enrol as many as they can find. The UK has done this for years, Denmark more recently and Sweden has



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

189

just followed suit. More will follow. A market for non-EU students familiarizes universities with the concept of a market for students. Again e-learning cannot be held directly responsible for this – wider societal changes and the ending of the ‘days of abundance’ are more to blame, but e-learning allows users to have more choice over where to study. There used to be a comforting myth in many countries that one went to school, got good grades and went to one’s local college. But in many of the more densely populated countries of Europe there is no one ‘local college’. An example may bring this home. My home-town of Sheffield has a population of 555,000 and thus general considerations suggest that it should support around two universities. It does – and a bus ride of 30 minutes takes me to two good universities, the University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University. But a train ride of an hour from my local station takes me to two more in Manchester, another in Derby, two more in Leeds – and I might even drive over the hills to Huddersfield. Oh – and I could study for some degrees at Sheffield College or Chesterfield College. For a full-time student living in Sheffield, any of these destinations are feasible. For a part-time study, several more – slightly further away – come into play. This approach holds true for staff too – nowadays full-time staff are even less full-time in attendance than full-time students are – thanks to the technologies that underpin e-learning. There is a market for staff too. An address list for any UK university of where the staff live makes fascinating reading. Even in countries where there is still substantial funding (grants or subsidized loans) the way that funding is allocated is often under review. In fact in several countries in Europe (Denmark, Sweden) and outside (Australia, New Zealand, several states of the USA) performance-based funding is either operational or under consideration (while recent research is confidential, the classic paper is Jongbloed and Vossensteyn 2001). This ties funding not only to the number of student places in a university but also to course completions, student feedback and other measures of quality. It is not by any means clear how this will change the Academy if the approach becomes widespread across the developed world.

Quality and regulation The discussion in the last section has been phrased in terms of public universities. But in almost all countries there are also private universities

190

International Perspectives on Higher Education

– some even are run not as foundations but as businesses for profit. In the USA and UK particularly there have been recent concerns over the quality of the education such private providers deliver. This issue comes into particular relief when government funding is involved – students at such universities can be eligible for government-subsidized student loans – as they are in the USA and as they possibly will be soon in the UK under certain conditions (such as maintaining fees at less than a certain level). Most countries that have accepted the phenomenon of private universities have some kind of accreditation body which approves the setting up of a private university. Indeed the existence of such a body – rather than either no regulation or direct ministry regulation – is a good touchstone of whether a country is comfortable with the concept of private universities. But even if a university is fully accredited there is nothing to stop it drifting off course unless there is an ongoing quality régime. However, as important as the issues are with private providers, are the current concerns from several governments that all is not well with the quality of the public university system. Increasingly feedback from students, their parents and a growing set of experts – including in the UK (House of Commons Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee 2009) – is raising questions about the way that universities appear largely to regulate themselves – and even when (as in most countries) there are national or regional quality agencies they are often run by ‘university people’. Not that student feedback is the be-all and end-all – students are not only customers, nor the only stakeholders in the survival and quality of universities. But students’ views are important. Most countries are in the process of improving their quality systems for universities. In the international arena, quality is seen (by governments) as a key component of reputation. In several countries – often in Asia – where there is a somewhat separate distance education sector, there are also moves to define, implement and refine specific quality systems for distance learning providers (Jung 2007). (Quite why these moves are not always coordinated with broader quality agendas is a mystery.) However, with some very rare exceptions, none of these quality systems take account of e-learning. (In fact, none of them take account of any kind of non-standard learning – e.g. in the workplace or at overseas campuses – taking place outside the classical paradigm of on-campus lectures and associated activity.) While it can be argued that this is perfectly acceptable when e-learning is a minor or non-strategic component of a course offering (for example when access to library books is replaced by access to e-books) the case seems far less convincing when a whole programme is offered by e-learning, as it is from the distance learning providers.



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

191

There have been a number of attempts from experts and agencies to address this issue – but all have so far failed. The reasons are varied but probably boil down to the following three: quality of e-learning is not (yet) an issue for international agencies; quality of e-learning is never a high enough priority for a national government; and that those involved in quality both within universities and the national agencies are by and large conservative personalities. Perhaps the most concerted attempt in recent years to define a régime for quality in e-learning took place in Sweden when the National Agency produced a well-researched set of guidelines (Högskoleverket 2008). Unfortunately the government changed shortly afterwards and the guidelines seem not to have been implemented. This is despite the fact that distance e-learning is a significant fraction of total student learning in Sweden. A somewhat different situation took place in the UK. In 1999 the quality agency produced some respectable set of guidelines (QAA 1999, updated 2010) for distance learning, with a number of experts involved. The guidelines rapidly went out of date during the explosion of e-learning in the early 2000s: in fact the UK e-university went from birth to death before the guidelines were revised, not very well, in 2004, in a cumbersome document. In the last two years a Special Interest Group of experts spent considerable energy on a further revision, producing an excellent report, only to find that the quality agency largely ignored it (QA-QE Special Interest Group 2010). A number of projects at the European level – funded by the European Commission – have also analysed these issues and produced recommendations. The problem there is that the EU has no jurisdiction over national quality agencies and so if the national quality agencies are not listening then there is no route forward for any recommendations that ensue. My view is that longer term such guidelines belong and should be developed for (or by) a new set of non-governmental accrediting agencies more appropriate to a mixed economy of public and private providers in an internationalizing world. I feel that valuable lessons could be learned from the way the US accrediting bodies operate, from international schemes for accrediting business schools and from the way that benchmarking e-learning has developed a set of standard methodologies (in the UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand and via some EU projects) with relatively small amounts of national funding and no help at all from national quality agencies (Bacsich 2009). In such schemes, and true for all modern benchmarking schemes, the student voice must be a key input.

192

International Perspectives on Higher Education

The student Along the way in this chapter, students have been a constant refrain – as they should be. However, one key aspect of student behaviour has not yet been discussed – changing student attitudes to copyright. Copyright, especially of audio-visual materials, is increasingly an esoteric (and boring) topic to students. This has serious consequences for those concerned with combating plagiarism. Plagiarism is one of these issues which is at the heart of the Academy. Superficially it seems an issue just to do with students and their tutors, but in reality it reaches deep into the system of administration of the student experience, and right up the hierarchy, up to Deans and beyond – as any academic who has been involved in plagiarism cases can attest. This is why we discuss it. In Academy terms it can be a capital offence – expulsion from the Academy being an intellectual death. As with all potential capital offences in most countries, a balance must be maintained, evidence must be compelling and high levels of scrutiny must be brought in. However, this caution must not be confused with the special pleading one often hears, including from experts who should know better. ‘This student is from a disadvantaged background, she didn’t know that this was wrong.’ (Did we ever tell her?) ‘That student comes from a culture where they venerate professors: he thought it was respectful to copy the professor’s material.’ (Nice to be a professor in such a culture, but not the point.) Recently, a long-serving professor put the key point pithily. ‘Plagiarism is in essence laziness’ (Jenkins 2011). But how to combat it? In addition to the obvious (but often missed) point that students have to learn the academic culture (of respect, comparison, referencing, etc.), the key techniques are not just plagiarism detection but also plagiarism avoidance. Plagiarism detection is the use of software tools to process files to detect plagiarism by comparing text in the files with a vast database of other material, including on the public web. But it has to be text. This brings up the key point is that one cannot blame e-learning for plagiarism. Plagiarism became an issue as soon as students started submitting word-processed assignments – on paper – exacerbated by professors having less contact with each student as class sizes grew. In fact automated plagiarism detection became far easier when assignments were submitted as actual files – despite students putting misplaced energy in trying to fool the system. Plagiarism avoidance is in essence the setting of assignments which are ‘keyed’ to the student’s own unique life experience and thus difficult for another student to submit. As an example, in an international distance



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

193

learning course on networking, one assignment was ‘describe the barriers to telecommunications operators providing a faster broadband service to your home, and what is being done to overcome these barriers’. Since the population for such courses are usually quite low and thinly spread we had very few cases of more than one student living in the same town. Using situated assignments and the above approaches has many other advantages: assignments become fresher, more authentic and last but not least, as at KTH in Sweden, more relevant to an international student body (Carroll and Zeitterling 2009). Coming back to students in the international arena brings us full circle – and to some conclusions.

Envoi: The institution endures The ‘flip’ answer to the question the chapter title implies – ‘What is the impact of e-learning in the twenty-first century university?’ is ‘not much’ – to which I would add ‘and that’s the problem’. Especially in the élite universities, those high in rank and with few difficulties in attracting good students, there can be large amounts of e-learning, both supporting the learning of on-campus students and directly teaching off-campus students, without university presidents being unduly aware of this or factoring it into their planning. Wealth and the former ‘culture of abundance’ in developed economies meant that hard decisions on costs and trade-offs could be avoided. Of course, two levels down from the top there are usually talented directors running the various e-learning-related services. The criticism many make of the for-profit distance teaching universities is that while they may be effective in e-learning – and even have lessons in service levels to teach other kinds of universities – they lack the depth of research and scholarship which many believe are central to a university. Has their effectiveness in e-learning come at the price of not being ‘fullservice’ universities? Less prestigious universities often turn to part-time campus and distance learning students – and to a focus on disadvantaged students – to break out of the numbers trap and gain additional income especially from international students. But so often their e-learning growth reaches a peak and seems to stall – staff leave, the government climate changes, students move on. They get bogged down with endless discussions on costs and reorganization.

194

International Perspectives on Higher Education

The open universities have had their near-death experiences over the years but have mostly managed to provide a workable balance of research, scholarship, teaching and service levels. But there are so few of them – and so few new ones are being developed! If one looks at all the new universities founded each year across the world, a tiny fraction have any visible focus on distance learning – despite exhortation from experts and international agencies. Yet in almost every other sector business is rapidly moving online – including in training, teaching’s ugly sister. Of course, universities are often criticized for being one of the few entities unchanged from medieval days. And we need more anthropologists to determine why the ‘rite of passage’ that is a four-year (or three-year) undergraduate degree remains so stable, flying in the face of any cost–benefit analysis especially for arts graduates from less prestigious universities. The wisest of all my research assistants, when asked the question ‘why do students go to university?’ replied ‘to fall in love’ (http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_of_Love) – and went on to argue that this process required at least two summers to be effective (I did not follow that part of her reasoning). My personal observation – from my non-standard academic career, unlike most academics – is that change really is slow but that those in the system do not realize that. I had a generation’s gap – 24 years (remember Dearing?) in my face-to-face teaching career between Oxford 1972 and Sheffield Hallam 1996. I came back to computers and projectors and email, not typewriters and blackboards and fax/telex, but the essence of lectures, timetables, supervisions and departmental politics was unchanged. At the OU, I worked in operational departments and not on course development between 1977 and 1988 – when I returned, change in fundamentals was minimal – except that academic productivity appeared to have declined (measured as Stakhanovite ‘authored modules per year’ – see http:// www.soviethistroy.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1936stakhanov &Year=1936). What seems to be missing is an ongoing process of innovation in institution-building. How to bring it about is not clear. Theories I have earlier floated about de-mergers and regionalization of providers find little favour and win few friends (Bacsich and Pepler 2009). There is a particular problem in Europe. Such models as might be the precursors of the kind of institutions I favour are much more common in other continents – whatever direction one travels in. This must at least in part be due to the increased role the private sector plays in other continents. Part may just be European ennui (we can seem to others a tired continent) – or it may



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

195

be that some massive quantum of population (above that in any one EU country) is required before such an ongoing process becomes feasible. In Europe, at least, the freeing up of institutional innovation would have to be coupled with more effective yet student-friendly ways of winding up institutions that no longer meet student needs. In our analytic project on virtual campuses, we took care rarely to use the word ‘failed’ about initiatives – instead we talked about ‘ceased’ (http://www.virualcampuses. eu/index.php/Ceased_E-Learning_Initative). Students may fail, but ‘the system’ should never fail to serve the student. ‘No experiment can be an experiment on the student’ we used to say at the OU. Yet to talk about ‘the system’ could be seen to challenge the autonomy of the institution. Something has to give before we can release the institutional innovation that the Academy – and the students it serves – merits for the twenty-first century. And you thought it was just about choosing which VLE to deploy! Note 1 Fuller details of all acronyms and of e-learning in/at countries and entities discussed can be found on the virtual campuses/schools wiki whose home page is http://www.virtualcampuses.eu/index.php/Main_Page

References Adamson, V., Bacsich, P., Chad, K., Kay, D. and Plenderleith, J. (2008) ‘JISC and SCONUL Library Management Systems Study: An evaluation and hoizon scan of the current library management systems and related systems landscape for UK higher education by Sero Consulting Ltd’. Available on http://www.jisc.ac.uk/ nedia/documents/programmes/resourcediscovery/lmsstudy.pdf Bacsich, P. (2005) ‘Lessons to be learned from the failure of the UK e-University’. Available on http://virualcampuses.eu/index.php/ Lessons_to_be_learned_from_the_failure_of_the_UK_e-University —(2009) ‘Bench-marking e-learning in UK universities: lessons from and for the international context’ Open Praxis 4 (2). Available on http://www.openpraxis. com/files.Bacsich%20et%20al.pdf Bacsich, P., Harrop, H. and Lackovic, N. (2010) Technology Enhanced Learning: Addressing the Gap Between Aspiration and Implementation: International Issues. Available on http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/captial/Yr2/ SummaryReports/50-D2-international.pdf Bacsich, P. and Pepler, G. (2009) Organisational Change – First Report, CAPITAL Horizon Scans Chad, K. and Miller, P. (2005) ‘Do libraries matter? The rise of the library 2.0’. Available on http://www.talis.com/applications/downloads/white_papers/ Dolibrariesmatter.pdf

196

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Carroll, J. and Zeitterling, C-M. (2009) ‘Guiding students away from plagiarism’ KTH Learning Lab’. Available on http://people.kth.se/”ambe/KTH/ Guidingstudents.pdf Chandler, C. J. and Gregory, A. S. (2010) ‘Sleeping with the enemy: Wiklipedia in the college classroom’ The History Teacher 43 (2) 247–57 Chickering, A. and Ehrmann, S. (1996) ‘Implementing the seven principles: Technology as a lever’ AAHE Bulletin October 1996, 3–6. Available on http:// www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html Dearing, Sir Ron, (1997) The National Committee of Enquiry into Higher Education. Available on http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/ncihe Högskoloverket (Swedish National Agency for Higher education) (2008) ‘E-learning quality: aspects and criteria for evaluation of e-learning in higher education. Available on http://www.eadtu.nl/e-xcellencelabel/files/0811R.pdf House of Commons Education and Skills Committee (2005) UK e-University, Third Report of Session 2004–5. Report available on http://www.publications. parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmeducki/205/205pdf House of Commons Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee (2009) Standards and Quality, 11th Report: Students and Universities. Available on http:// www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmdius/170/17008. htm (Chapter 5) Jenkins, R. (2011) ‘Toward a rational response to plagiarism’ Chronicle of Higher Education 14 August 2011. Available on http://chronicle.com/article/Toward-aRational-Response-to/128611/?sid=wb&utm_source=wb&utm_medium=en Jongbloed, B. and Vossensteyn, H. (2001) ‘Keeping up performances: an international survey of performance-based funding in higher education’ Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 23 (2) 127-45 Jung, I. (2007) ‘Editorial – Regional focus on Asia Minor: changing faces of open and distance learning in Asia’ International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning volume 8 (1). Available on http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/ article/download/1096/1915 Maton, S. and Kervin, L. (2008) ‘The “digital natives” debate: a critical review of the evidence’ British Journal of Educational Technology 39 (5) 775–86 OER University (2011) Open Educational Resource University: Towards a Logic Model and Plan for Action. Available on http://www.wikieducator.org/images/c/c2/ Report_OERU-Final_version.pdf Open University (2006) ‘The Open University retains number one ranking for student satisfaction’. Available on http://www3.open.ac.uk/media/fullstiry.aspx? id=9376 PricewaterhouseCoopers (2000) Business Model for the e-University (Report 00/44.) Available on http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2000/00.44.htm QA-QE Special Interest Group (2010) ‘QAA Code of Practice section 2: collaborative provision and flexible and distributed learning (including e-learning) – a commentary and critique’. Available on http://qaqe-sig.net/?attachment_id=158 Quality Assurance Agency (1999, updated 2010) Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education: Collaborative provision and flexible and distributed learning (including e-learning) – Amplified version October 2010 Gloucester: QAA



Impact of e-Learning in the Twenty-first Century University

197

Rowlands, I. and Fieldhouse, M. (2007) ‘British Library/JISC: Information behaviour of the scholar of the future – trends in scholarly information behaviour’. Available on http://jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/ repres/ggworkpackagei.pdf

Internet sources http://ec.europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/education/university/fees/ index_en.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascension_(Stargate)#Ascension http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Dearing,_Baron_Dearing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_of_Love http://open-ils.org http://revica.europace.org http://www.dest.gov.au/archive/highered/eippubs/eip00_3/split.htm http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/vre.aspx http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/capital/ http://www.slideshare.net/ranihgill/theres-already-an-e-in-learning http://www.softarc.com http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1936stakhanov &Year=1936 http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-2011/ top-200.html http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/BorderlessSummary. pdf http://www.virtualcampuses.eu/index.php/Ceased_E-Learning_Initiative http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/serv_e/education_e/education_e.htm

Chapter 10

A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning Rosie Le Cornu

Introduction In Chapter 7 Kingsley looked at how the theories of globalization and internationalism expounded by Ngawana and Liu might be translated into practical international experience. Here, the issue of experiential learning is re-visited in more depth to see how this approach can, and should, be incorporated into Higher Education (HE). The particular concern here is with practice-based or work-based approaches in teacher education: how they work, the problems associated with implementing them, and how students might make the most effective use of these opportunities. If HE is to continue to be held in high esteem by society, then clients need to be involved with and value community–work–education partnerships.

Backgound It is well understood among academics and practitioners alike that experiential learning is a key strategy for engaging students in their learning. Experiential learning in HE has been described as ‘curriculum options that recognize learning experiences outside the classroom, and which integrate these off-campus experiences into an academic program’ (DeGiacomo 2002 : 245). It is also often known as ‘practice-based learning’ or ‘work-integrated learning’ and focuses on authentic and active learning in workplaces. Experiential learning can take a number of forms including workplace practicums, industry site visits, global experiences and community service, to name a few. Experiential learning, in the form of workplace practicums, has a long history and is a well accepted practice in teacher education. As Bullough and Russell (2010) recently wrote: Including field experience in a teacher education program is universally taken for granted. Teacher education programs implicitly and explicitly



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

199

place considerable emphasis on the relevance of field experiences to teacher candidates’ development. It is recognized consistently in both the literature and in reports on teacher education as a critically important part of teacher education courses (e.g. Ramsey 2000; Darling-Hammond 2006; Zeichner 2010). Moreover, it is unequivocally rated by pre-service teachers as the most important component of their initial teacher education. While professional experiences are regarded as being pivotal to initial teacher education, they are not without their critics, nor, as shall be shown, are they problem-free. This chapter highlights the role of workplace practicums in teacher education programmes and describes a model that has been developed at the University of South Australia, in response to the ‘changing landscape’ (Clandinin 2008) of both schools and universities. The current context for practicums in teacher education in Australia and elsewhere in the world is extremely challenging. Teacher education itself is facing a plethora of challenges currently with the ‘shifting social landscape’ (Clandinin 2009) and positioned as it is amid the changing landscapes of both schools and universities. Clandinin (2009) has noted the influences of globalization, refugee populations, immigration, demographics, economic disparities and environmental changes on teachers and teachers’ work. Moreover, she, together with other writers currently (e.g. Smyth et al. 2008; Bloomfield 2009) has also highlighted the effect of government policy decisions that impact directly and indirectly on the daily lives of teachers. These include: curriculum frameworks and syllabi; teacher accountability and performance management; national professional standards for teachers; social inclusion and equity policies; national standardized testing; behaviour management; special needs; and indigenous education to name a few. In fact, some would argue that teachers are now subjected to more policy régimes and controls than any other professional group (Smyth et al. 2008: 112). There is no doubt that teachers’ work today is intense, complex and challenging. Academics’ work has also become more intense with the increased foci on research, research outputs and internationalization. In addition for teacher educators, there are increasing expectations concerning accountability and conformity within professional standards frameworks (Bloomfield 2009). There is a very human impact of the changing landscapes. This is evident in the increasing numbers of Early Career Teachers leaving the profession within the first five years (Ewing and Smith 2003; Moon 2007) and increasing problems associated with morale and well-being among teachers

200

International Perspectives on Higher Education

and teacher educators (Gu and Day 2007; Hammond and Churchman 2008). Most recently, there is also an emerging trend of increasing numbers of student teachers leaving initial teacher education programmes (Chambers et al. 2010). The increasing attention being paid to the emotional dimensions of teachers’ work (Hargreaves 1998; Isenbarger and Zembylas 2006) and teacher educators’ work (Hastings 2008; Le Cornu 2008) in the literature is also indicative of the impact that the ‘changing landscapes’ are having in teacher education. In this chapter I argue that it is because of this human impact that there is a need for a sustainable model for experiential learning in teacher education. By sustainable I mean one that can withstand the pressures of the changing landscapes of universities and schools and is able to meet the current and future demands of the profession. Such a model highlights the relational nature of teaching and prioritizes mutually sustaining relationships. The chapter begins with some background information on the Australian context and introduces the learning communities model of professional experience that has been developed at the University of South Australia. It then discusses what we are learning about the model’s effectiveness and identifies the elements that make it sustainable. The chapter concludes with a look at the implications for governments, systems, teacher educators and teachers.

Context In the Australian National Inquiry into Teacher Education (2007), the practicum was again identified as a key persistent problem area, as can be seen in the following statement; The problems with practicum have been outlined in nearly every report addressing teacher education in the last decade. The fact that these problems have still drawn so much attention in this inquiry indicates the need for major reform in this area, involving all major players and all members of the system. (Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia 2007: 73) The fact that there is still a call for major reform is a worry. Practicum reform, or ways of rethinking the practicum in order to enhance learning outcomes for student teachers and other participants, has been occurring in many teacher education programmes, both in Australia and overseas, for



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

201

the past few decades. This is a result of trying to rectify the many problems with practicum which have been well recognized in the literature and government reports. These problems relate to staffing, curriculum and pedagogy, school placements and supervision, with one of the perennial problems being the disconnection between campus and field-based teacher education (Vick 2006). Hence for example, Cochran-Smith (1991) wrote that institutions across the USA were in the process of ‘reinventing student teaching’ by altering its duration, timing, requirements, connection to university courses and seminars, and the type and intensity of supervision. Dobbins (1993) identified similar trends in Australia where changes to the traditional structures of the practicum and supervision resulted in more collaborative and democratic models being implemented. Since then there has been a plethora of articles in the literature describing innovative programmes aimed at reducing practicum problems and enhancing student teacher learning outcomes. However problems and questions persist. As Bullough and Russell (2010) recently wrote: ‘Questions abound concerning field experience: Who should assess teacher candidates? How long should field experience be? When should field experience start? Who selects associate teachers? What is the role of the university in field supervision?’ They go on to ask what they term a ‘big-picture’ question; Why do traditional images of the role of field experience persist in teacher education despite decades of apparent reform? A growing problem is the difficulty of finding enough quality placements for student teachers as teachers are increasingly reluctant to accept them. The latest ‘solution’ in Australia sees a renewed call for ‘partnerships’. The idea of ‘partnerships’ in teacher education is not new. There has been a long established call for school–university partnerships in the literature and government reports (e.g. Bullough and Kauchak 1997; Goodlad 1988; Peters 1997; Yeatman and Sachs 1995). It is widely recognized that the student teaching experience is improved if schools and universities are ‘in partnership’. Hence we have seen an increasing number of professional experience programmes being fostered in the last decades as a result of mandated partnership structures that are supported by targeted funding régimes. This is the case in the USA for example, where Professional Development Schools were established to support both pre-service and in-service teacher learning. In the UK a climate of deregulation has delivered a diversity of initial teacher education pathways and partnerships between a wide range of providers. Now in Australia a new mandate for ‘partnerships’ has emerged within recent federal reforms in Australia as presented in National Partnership Agreement on Improving Teaching Quality

202

International Perspectives on Higher Education

(COAG 2008). While it is envisaged that this will have a positive impact on the development of more collaborative relationships between schools and higher institutions in the future, it is too early at the time of writing this chapter, to report on any widespread changes that have occurred as a direct result of the mandate. Rather, as noted by White et al. (2010: 183), ‘the current range of practices within Australian teacher education institutions reflects different understandings of “partnerships”’. Some reflect the traditional model where universities provide the theoretical understandings and the school classroom provides the practical application. Others provide a different model altogether. This chapter describes one of the ‘different models’.

The model: Learning communities Theoretical underpinnings At the University of South Australia’s School of Education attempts are being made to reconceptualize professional experiences around the notion of learning communities. A learning communities model builds on the reflective conceptualization of professional experience which has been implemented over the last decade and a half (Le Cornu and Ewing 2008). In both these models there is an acknowledgement of ‘personally owned professional knowledge’ which is gradually built up by integrating learning in a range of university and school sites (Meere 1993). Professional experiences are seen as opportunities for reflection on practice. Both of these conceptualizations are in sharp contrast to ‘the ‘sink and swim’ and ‘do it yourself’ (Britzman 2003; Darling-Hammond 1994) view of student teaching in the typical practicum’ (Mule 2006: 216). The ‘typical practicum’ refers to the familiar arrangement of prospective teachers learning theory from a Faculty of Education before practising teaching under the supervision of an experienced teacher. In this traditional model the focus is on individual student teachers mastering a set of technical skills without any focus on professional decision-making or the development of collaborative practices. The learning communities model is underpinned by a social constructivist view of learning which suggests that learning should be ‘participatory, proactive, communal, collaborative and given over to the construction of meanings rather than receiving them’ (Bruner 1996: 84). It builds on the work of Lave and Wenger (1991) and Wenger (1999) who conceptualized communities of practice as particular kinds of networks of people who were engaging in a situated learning process. Such a move fits with the latest



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

203

trend reported in both the teacher professional development and school reform literatures which is the establishment of professional learning communities that provide a positive and enabling context for in-service teachers’ professional growth (McLaughlin 1997; Peters 2001). By participating in such communities, teachers provide support and challenge for each other to ‘learn new practices and to unlearn old assumptions, beliefs and practices’ (McLaughlin 1997: 84) and actively shape their own professional growth through reflective participation. The learning communities model is also informed by hybridity theory and the idea of a third space which recognizes that individuals draw on multiple discourses to make sense of the world (Bhabba 1990). Zeichner (2010) has used this notion of third space to call for the creation of hybrid spaces in pre-service teacher education ‘that bring together school and university-based teacher educators and practitioner and academic knowledge in new ways to enhance the learning of prospective teachers’ (2010: 92). The learning communities model creates these hybrid spaces by providing new opportunities for the various participants involved in professional experience to work differently and more collaboratively. Changes have needed to be made to how professional experiences are structured and to the roles of the various participants involved. These are described in the following section. For the purpose of illustration, the focus in this chapter is on the two-year Graduate Master of Teaching (primary) programme. This programme usually has a cohort of approximately 70 students. (The learning communities model has also been implemented in the undergraduate Bachelor of Education programme which has cohorts of approximately 200 students.) The first year of the Masters programme includes two professional experience courses. Each course has a series of on-campus workshops, an online component and a placement. The placement for the first course consists of four individual introductory days over as many weeks preceding a two-week block. The placement for the second course has six introductory days over six weeks and a four-week block. Both placements occur in the same school so that pre-service teachers have time to build professional relationships, participate in a whole-school experience and have the opportunity to follow children’s learning across a school year. Changes in nomenclature and roles The first change is in the term used to describe the experience itself. Instead of ‘practicum’ we have adopted the term, ‘professional experience’.

204

International Perspectives on Higher Education

Ramsey (2000: 61) highlighted the importance of this change in terminology when he wrote: A major shift needs to be made in teacher education from the idea of the practicum to the concept of professional experience, workplace learning which is integrated with academic preparation and educational studies. The term ‘mentor’ is being used deliberately in association with the role of the supervisory teacher, which has become ‘mentor teacher’ and the terms ‘peer mentor’ and ‘university mentor’ are also used. The adoption of the term mentor is in its latest conceptualization, that is, one which emphasizes collegiality and reciprocity. The focus is on relationships, in keeping with Awaya et al. (2003: 46) who stressed that ‘mentoring is a relationship rather than a role with a set of preconceived duties’. The term ‘student teacher’ is being replaced with ‘pre-service teacher’ wherever possible. It is hoped that with the change in name will come enhanced expectations both from the perspective of the pre-service teachers themselves and their mentors and that this will lead to all involved accepting increased responsibility for their own and other’s learning. Changes in how professional experiences are structured Professional experience courses are being restructured to aim for an intimate linking of on-campus, online and in-school learning with an explicit commitment to strengthening partnerships with school-based colleagues. Professional experience course teams have been developed where each lecturer is responsible for the teaching, learning and assessment of their workshop group of approximately 25 students in relation to the on-campus, online and in-school components of the course. This enables each lecturer to foster a community atmosphere in the workshops on campus even before the pre-service teachers go out into schools. The notion of community is further developed during the pre-service teachers’ time in schools, as they are clustered in school sites, in groups of 6 to 8. This approach differs markedly from what was done previously where a number of staff would teach the on-campus component of professional experience courses and then sessional staff would be employed to supervise out in schools. When this occurred the lecturer could visit a school and not know any of the pre-service teachers and similarly many of the pre-service teachers did not know each other either. Moreover, traditionally some schools would only



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

205

host small numbers of pre-service teachers which hampered efforts to foster the notion of community. Professional experiences are also being changed to incorporate a range of structured opportunities for pre-service teachers to work collaboratively with each other. Such opportunities engage the pre-service teachers acting as critical friends and peer mentors for each other. Time and space is factored into the experience to enable them to develop these learning relationships. For example, paired placements are incorporated to enable them to act as critical friends and provide each other with constructive feedback after lessons rather than depend solely on feedback from the mentor teacher. Another example is that of ‘Learning Circles’. Learning Circles is the name given to pre-service teacher meetings which are held after school to enable them to engage in professional dialogue with each other. Pre-service teachers are informed at the beginning of their first professional experience course that participation in Learning Circles requires a dual commitment from them. That is, to be responsible for their own learning and also to make a contribution to the learning of their peers. New supervisory practices: developing learning partnerships New supervisory practices are emerging as a result of the emphasis on learning communities. While the School of Education had previously had a commitment to the notion of strong school–university partnerships, the realities of professional experience supervision militated against this being a reality. Indeed, as described by Martinez (2004), supervision practices of university staff are often perfunctory, involve ‘snatched conversations’ and allow little time for critique or reflective practice. With the advent of a learning communities model for professional experience, the focus is on the development of ‘learning partnerships’. These learning partnerships differ depending on the particular context and nature of the school. However the emphasis is on developing ongoing relationships and sharing the responsibility for maximizing the pre-service teachers’ learning. This has resulted in two quite distinct changes. First we have changed how university mentors work with pre-service teachers and staff in schools. We have always made school visits for the two professional experience courses under discussion (two visits for the first course and three visits for the second), however we have moved to a per site model of support to replace the per student model of supervision. Each

206

International Perspectives on Higher Education

visit includes the university mentor spending as much time with the mentor teachers and site coordinators as with the pre-service teachers. So, for example, in a two-hour visit, the university mentor spends an hour involved in a ‘learning conversation’ with the group of pre-service teachers, half an hour with the mentor teachers and half an hour with the coordinator. In this way the university mentor can offer support to the whole school learning community rather than monitor the individual pre-service teacher in the classroom unless the mentor teacher identifies a pre-service teacher to be at risk. Where it can occur, the university mentor involves mentor teachers in collaborative learning conversations about the role of being a mentor teacher but this is very contextual as it often depends on whether or not the teachers can be released from their classroom duties. The second change is in relation to the school-based staff. The learning communities model specifically targets the role of the School Coordinator. This term designates the person in a school responsible for pre-service teachers and it is undertaken generally by either the principal or deputy principal or a lead teacher. Traditionally ‘the practicum’ has concentrated on three participants – the student teacher, cooperating teacher and university supervisor (Gaffey and Dobbins 1996; Guyton and McIntyre 1990; Zeichner 1999). While there is no doubt that these roles are central to a successful professional experience, we would argue that so too is role of the coordinator. Traditionally the role of the coordinator has revolved around the managerial and administrative responsibilities associated with having pre-service teachers in a school. However in the learning communities model, the coordinator plays a much more enhanced role, that of a pedagogical or educative role. They take on a shared responsibility to support pre-service teachers’ learning during their professional experiences by helping them directly with their learning, supporting the mentor teachers and working closely with the university mentor (Le Cornu 2011). Ongoing professional learning among professional experience staff A feature of the implementation of the learning communities model is the ongoing professional learning opportunities among and between school-based and university-based professional experience staff. In relation to the school-based staff involved in professional experience this model as mentioned above targets the role of the School Coordinator. Regular meetings are held between the university mentors and the School Coordinators to enable them to come together to pause, reflect and engage in professional dialogue with their peers about the learning to



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

207

teach process. The focus in these meetings is on coordinators’ learning about their role. The university mentors also plan their school visits in collaboration with the coordinators so that each time they visit, there is time for further dialogue. These opportunities for conversations are important to develop shared understandings, to foster relationships and to develop collaborative practices to scaffold pre-service teacher learning. Professional learning is also provided for university mentors in the form of structured times set aside for them to meet together regularly to reflect on their practices and deepen their understanding of the ‘new’ way of working with pre-service teachers and schools. Their new way of working is to ‘support student teachers to develop the social and intellectual capacities to enable them to participate in ethical and socially responsible ways in learning communities, both now and in the future’ (Le Cornu and Ewing 2008). This is very different to their traditional role and requires them to help pre-service teachers to reframe and coach them in responses which enable them to take responsibility for the decisions they make. A number of studies and evaluations of these initiatives have been undertaken over the last five years (see for example, Le Cornu 2008, 2009a, 2010). Findings have illuminated many benefits for reframing professional experiences around the notion of learning communities. For example, the development of relationships between school-based and universitybased teacher educators based on mutual benefit and mutual respect, the enhancement of pre-service resilience, the role of professional conversations for ongoing professional learning, the value of peer support and the willingness of schools to participate in the program. (This latter finding is not insignificant given the national trend of teacher withdrawal from hosting placements as outlined in the introduction to this chapter.) They have also highlighted a number of challenges and dilemmas for the various stakeholders as a result of many ‘taken for granted’ assumptions being brought into question and both traditional and non-traditional boundaries being crossed. However a common finding that has emerged from all of the studies is the power of reciprocal learning relationships. It is my view that reciprocal learning relationships are at the heart of a sustainable approach to experiential learning.

Discussion The learning communities model as it has been enacted in this Master of Teaching programme emphasizes the reciprocal nature of the learning

208

International Perspectives on Higher Education

process and the development of reciprocal ways of working. In so doing, reciprocal learning relationships are fostered. Such relationships are mutually sustaining or ‘growth fostering’. As Jordan (2006) explains: ‘The importance of these relationships is not just that they offer support, but that they also provide an opportunity to participate in a relationship that is growth-fostering for the other person as well as themselves’ (2006: 88). Jordan maintains that growth fostering connections are characterized by mutuality, empowerment and the development of courage. These three concepts provide the framework for illuminating some of the emerging insights about what makes the learning communities model both sustaining and sustainable. Mutuality The characteristic of mutuality resonates with the notion of reciprocity which, it has been argued, underpins the learning communities model of professional experience (see Le Cornu and Ewing 2008). By reciprocity we mean the development within learning communities of learners’ commitment to and responsibility for their own learning and well-being, as well as that of other members of the community. One of the strong features of the learning communities model is its explicit focus on learning for all participants. This focus privileges learning above all else and so relationships are all constructed around this notion. There is an expectation that all participants, including the university mentors and coordinators, will be learners. Positioning oneself in this way and being positioned by others in this way means that opportunities are created for people to relate differently. Different kinds of relationships can evolve that are not so heavily concentrated on a hierarchy of power. One might argue that new partnerships are developed between and among pre-service teachers, mentor teachers, school coordinators and university mentors. As Cardini (2006: 410) noted, while the discourse within partnerships often emphasizes cooperation and trust it ‘hides the complex struggles for power that take place in working relationships’. It is no secret that there are many traditional barriers between schools and universities (often referred to as the schools–university divide in Teacher Education reports) which often exacerbate efforts of teachers and teacher educators working together in collaboration. Kruger et al. (2009: 94) explained: ‘intentional or not teacher education is commonly experienced as sets of hierarchies: the university and the school; the teacher educator and the



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

209

teacher; the teacher and the pre-service teacher and the teacher educator and the pre-service teacher’. This is not to suggest that the power imbalances between all participants in professional experience are obliterated in the learning communities model but by having an explicit focus on learning, it ensures that at least there is the potential for reciprocal learning relationships to be developed. These relationships are in direct contrast to the traditional relationships often perpetuated in professional experience. However it is in keeping with more recent calls in the literature for what have been described as ‘altered relationships’ (Kruger et al. 2009) or ‘de-institutionalised relationships’ (Smyth et al. 2008). Such relationships require changes to the deeply entrenched ways of relating in teaching and teacher education which continue to thwart innovation in the field. A feature that enables reciprocal relationships to be developed in this model is the year-long association with each partner school. Having a longer time commitment enables higher levels of trust and respect to be developed between the various participants than would otherwise have been possible in traditional one-off placement settings for practicum that occur over one school term. The importance of building trust over time has been reported in Professional Development School studies (e.g. Whitehead and Fitzgerald (2007). Another feature is the presence of and provision for conversations among the various participants. As well as opportunities for professional conversations among pre-service teachers, mentor teachers and teacher educators, there are opportunities for professional conversations between pre-service teachers and their peers and between teacher educators and school coordinators, between mentor teachers and their peers and so on. Hence new spaces are created for professional dialogue where different knowledges about teaching and learning and different aspects of expertise are mutually valued. This is an example of Zeichner’s third space at work. As Zeichner (2010: 92) explained, ‘creating third spaces in teacher education involves an equal and more dialectical relationship between academic and practitioner knowledge in support of student teacher learning’. Empowerment Jordan (2006: 86) cites empowerment as one of the building blocks of ‘growth-fostering connections’. She maintains that such connections enable

210

International Perspectives on Higher Education

participants to experience energy, creativity and flexibility and compares this to the situation in isolation, where ‘we repeat old patterns, are caught in repetitive cognitions and often are disempowered’ (2006: 85). There is no doubt that the learning communities model has the potential for a more empowering experience for all participants than one that is dominated by traditional roles and traditional patterns of interaction. It is empowering at two levels. First, at the micro or school level – the model invites a deeper level of participation from all participants. Traditional boundaries around roles are blurred and the roles themselves are expanded to enhance individual agency and enable multi-level participation. For example the role of the pre-service teacher is much more significant than it has ever been. It has expanded to not only include a commitment to their own learning and well-being but it also requires a commitment to their peers’ learning and well-being. Moreover, they are expected to make a contribution to the whole school not just the classroom in which they are placed. Mentor teachers and coordinators are positioned as trusted professional colleagues and hence their roles are changing (Le Cornu 2010). Certainly the role of the university mentor is expanding to one that aims to support and to change the traditional power differential. Martin et al. (2011: 308) also found this in their experiences as university liaison ‘navigating the terrain of third space’. They explained; Fostering balances of power between actors in the student teaching settings fell to us. As we sought to create these balances, we consciously and explicitly worked to distribute power to create equity. For us, helping pre-service teachers and mentor teachers feel empowered to take risks was a major goal. The second level at which the learning communities model is empowering is at the macro level – it is challenging the status quo or the traditional view of ‘how prac is done’. The coordinators are key players here – they play a vital role in the re-culturing of professional experience. That is, in bringing about changes in the shared beliefs, customs, attitudes and expectations around professional experience. We know, from the literature on educational change, that both restructuring (changing the rules, roles, responsibilities and relationships) and re-culturing (changing the shared beliefs, customs, attitudes and expectations) are necessary for successful educational reform (Hargreaves 1994; Newmann and Wehlage 1995).



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

211

The coordinators willingly and wholeheartedly embraced the changes made to professional experience and were advocates of these changes with their staffs. They also willingly embarked on a learning journey for themselves about the different discourses of professional experience, and attending meetings to learn more and asked for readings to further their understandings. They consciously and explicitly engaged with changes to nomenclature and changes to the discourse of professional experience. They, together with the university mentors, deliberately adopted a more holistic and inclusive discourse around professional experience. They rejected the provocative establishment of oppositional binaries that has occurred traditionally which has seen the implicit hierarchy within teacher education programmes position ‘academic’ work above ‘practical’ work. This means that they did not talk about the theory/practice divide or talk about being a teacher or being a learner as though they are diametrically opposed. Instead they nurtured the notion of and in their thinking, rather than either/or. This was, and continues to be very significant work. It is my belief that a discourse of professional experience, which reflects the realities of being a teacher and a learner or working with theory and practice allows for the shifting, changing landscapes of schools and universities. Development of courage The third feature of ‘growth fostering connections’ is, according to Jordan, the development of courage, which she defines as the capacity to move into situations when we feel fear or hesitation. She notes that as human beings, we are constantly in interactions that are either encouraging or discouraging. Given the nature of the relationships that were developed in the learning communities model, there were many opportunities for the various participants to provide support to each other to cope with the ‘changing landscape’ of schools and universities. The pre-service teachers themselves played a key role in ‘keeping each other going’ through the highs and lows of their professional experiences by providing each other with much needed emotional support. This finding resonates with that of Nieto (2003) who found, in her study of American high school teachers, that what had kept them going was ‘emotional stuff’ and she concluded that in the contemporary contexts for teaching ‘a learning community is an important incentive that keeps teachers going’ (cited in Gu and Day 2007: 1304). She wrote:

212

International Perspectives on Higher Education

In pursuit of learning in the ‘communities of practice’ (Wenger 1998), teachers will consolidate a sense of belonging and shared responsibility, enhance morale and perceived efficacy, develop aspects of resilient qualities, and thrive and flourish socially and professionally. (Cited in Gu and Day 2007: 1304) Mentor teachers also played a key role in providing encouraging and challenging scaffolding for the process of learning to teach. This is an unsurprising finding given that we have known for a long time that they have a major influence on their pre-service teachers’ professional experiences (McIntyre 1991; Zeichner 1990). However our studies have reinforced the importance of dialogue between mentor teachers and pre-service teachers. The mentor teachers engaged in learning conversations with their pre-service teachers, where they shared their knowledge and understandings about the profession, and encouraged their pre-service teachers to articulate their emerging understandings. These conversations supported the pre-service teachers to build their courage and take risks in their teaching and learning. Similarly the supportive relationships developed between the coordinators and university mentors meant that they were able to sustain positive feelings such as interest, enthusiasm, confidence and trust even in the face of ongoing challenges which resulted from the changing contexts of schools and universities. Fullan (1997: 221) linked such positive feelings to the powerful emotion of ‘hope’: Understanding the intimate two-way link between emotion and hope is a powerful insight. Hope is not a naïve, sunny view of life. It is the capacity not to panic in tight situations, to find ways and resources to address difficult problems. He suggested that one way to develop the conditions that promote hope is to improve relationships both within the setting and with external networks. There is no doubt that the opportunities for collaboration and professional discourse between the university mentors and the school coordinators provided sources of encouragement that enabled them to stay hopeful and deal with the vicissitudes of professional experiences. In summary it can be seen that the establishment of trusting, respectful and reciprocal relationships helps teachers, pre-service teachers and teacher educators cope with the uncertain and ambiguous landscape in which we are all working. It is useful at this point to refer back to



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

213

the definition of a sustainable model of experiential learning that was provided in the Background. A sustainable model was defined as one that could withstand the pressures of the changing landscapes of universities and schools and is able to meet the current and future demands of the profession. It is because the learning communities model is predicated on reciprocal relationships that the model is sustainable. Not only are these relationships sustaining in and of themselves for the current context but they are futures orientated. The model is self-perpetuating in that the relationships that we are advocating for development at the pre-service level are directly applicable to in-service, both with children and staff. Pre-service teachers are developing their capacities to build ‘altered’ or ‘de-institutionalised’ relationships with both children and adults. This has implications for classroom and school relationships and professional experience relationships. It is hoped that as future mentor teachers, they will ‘supervise’ their pre-service teachers in different ways because they themselves were ‘supervised’ differently.

Implications It is not possible within the confines of this chapter for a full discussion of the implications of implementing a sustainable learning communities model of professional experience. Suffice it to say that if the development of learning communities is to be taken seriously, there are implications for teacher educators, teachers, leaders, pre-service teachers, systems personnel and policy-makers alike. Kruger et al. (2009: 12 ) in their study on ‘effective and sustainable partnerships’, wrote: ‘No finding is clearer in this study than the need for active contributions by school systems and governments.’ It is very apparent that this contribution would need to come in the form of funding for new institutional arrangements and initiatives. There needs to be fully funded changes at the wider systems and government levels and changes to policies to ensure that partnership arrangements for professional experience in initial teacher education are funded appropriately. Zeichner (2010: 96) suggested that this funding could be made available by reallocating much of the money currently being spent on the ‘bureaucratic and hyper rationalized monitoring of programs’ to support school–university partnerships. A second implication is that there needs to be a commitment from universities to first value teacher education, and second value the work

214

International Perspectives on Higher Education

of teacher educators in ‘negotiating the terrain of third space’ (Martin et al. 2011). A significant contextual issue is that teacher education in general is still seen as a low-status field of study in many research universities (Zeichner 2005). Given this, a worrying trend around the world is the decreasing involvement of tenured university staff in professional experience work. Zeichner (2005) made the point that in the USA, frequently the work of supervising students in their field placements is ‘farmed out’ to adjunct staff who often have very little connection to the rest of the teacher education programme. Clandinin (2008) noted that in Canada, pre-service teacher education is largely taught by sessional and post-graduate students and these are the people who go into schools. A similar disturbing trend is occurring in some parts of Australia. I would argue that now more than ever before, given the changing landscapes of both universities and schools, there is a need for academics’ work in professional experience to be valued and rewarded. The role of the academic in professional experience has never been more important than within the current context. The learning communities model described in this chapter requires the direct engagement of tenured academics who are able to teach an explicit professional experience curriculum on-campus and then consciously and deliberately support this curriculum in schools. The explicit on-campus curriculum is aimed at developing pre-service teachers’ reflective skills and attitudes and their capacities for professional engagement with colleagues. The in-school curriculum requires the academic to be able to do a lot of ‘border crossing’ (Giroux 2005) in order to lead and support changes in attitudes with school-based staff and pre-service teachers and to develop authentic learning relationships. This involves not only crossing the traditional boundaries of universities and schools but also many other less visible boundaries which are found in the intense cognitive, metacognitive, affective, interpersonal and intrapersonal work in which professional experience academics are involved (Le Cornu 2009b). I agree with Martin et al. (2011: 309) who concluded that time and institutional support were critical for the development of effective practices that ‘support transformative teacher education’. The model described in this chapter had the support of the school leaders involved and the support of the Head of School of Education at the University of South Australia. This support is key as it resulted in the provision of the conditions that are necessary to enable ‘sustaining spaces’ (Clandinin 2008) to be found. For example, the teacher educators were able to include their university mentor work in their acknowledged workload and the school principal or



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

215

deputy principal adopted the role of the coordinator to ensure that the programme was fully supported at the school level. The final implication is that we need to be realistic and acknowledge that any substantial change like that which has been described in this chapter will require a lot of effort and goodwill – at the personal as well as the systems level. As Bullough and Russell (2010: 93) noted, in responding to the learning communities model: ‘This is an interesting trend, yet it will take massive efforts to transform the deeply entrenched culture of existing field experience arrangements and practices.’

Conclusion It is concluded that a learning communities model of professional experience is an example of a sustainable model of experiential learning. It is sustainable because it can withstand the pressures of the changing landscapes of universities and schools and is able to meet the current and future demands of the profession. A learning communities model engages participants in schools and universities in new ways that emphasize collegiality, authenticity and reciprocity. It is acknowledged that the development of reciprocal relationships is not without its challenges given the historical imbalances in power between schools and universities and between the participants involved in professional experience. However, it is not impossible as the example described in this chapter, together with those examples described elsewhere (e.g. Kruger et al. 2009; Lefever-Davis et al. 2007; Martin et al. 2011) have shown.

References Awaya, A., McEwan, H., Heyler, D., Linsky, S., Lum, D. and Wakukawa, P. (2003) ‘Mentoring as a journey’ Teaching and Teacher Education 19, 45–56 Bhabba, H. (1990) ‘The third space’ in Rutherford, J. (ed.) Identity, Community, Culture and Difference. London: Lawrence & Wishart pp. 207–21 Bloomfield, D. (2009) ‘Working within and against neoliberal accreditation agendas: opportunities for professional experience’ Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 37 (1) 27–44 Britzman, D. (2003) Practice makes perfect: A critical study of learning to teach Albany, NY: State University of New York Press Bruner, J. (1996) The Culture of Education London: Harvard University Press Bullough, R. V. Jr and Kauchak, D. (1997) ‘Partnerships between higher education

216

International Perspectives on Higher Education

and secondary schools: some problems’ Journal of Education for Teaching, 23 (3) 215–33 Bullough, S. and Russell, T. (2010) ‘Does teacher education expect too much from field experience?’ in T. Falkenberg and H. Smits (eds) Field Experiences in the Context of Reform of Canadian Teacher Education Programs Manitoba: University of Manitoba Cardini, A. (2006) ‘An analysis of the rhetoric and practice of educational partnerships in the UK: an arena of complexities, tensions and power’ Journal of Educational Policy 21 (4) 393–415 Chambers, G., Hobson, A. and Tracey, L. (2010) ‘Teaching could be a fantastic job but . . .’: three stories of student teacher withdrawal from initial teacher education programs in England’ Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 16 (1) 111–29 Clandinin, J. (2008) Attending to Changing Landscapes . . . Shaping our Identities as Teacher Educators, Keynote address at the Australian Teacher Education Association Conference, 8–11 July, Sunshine Coast —(2009) ‘Attending to changing landscapes: shaping the interwoven identities of teachers and teacher educators’ Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 37 (2) 141–54 Cochran-Smith, M. (1991) ‘Learning to teach against the grain’ Educational Review 61 (3) 279–310 (COAG) Council of Australian Governments (2008) National partnership agreement on improving teacher quality. Retrieved 30 May 2011, from http:// www.coag.gov.au/intergov_agreements/federal_financial_relations/docs/ national_partnership/national_partnership_on_improving_teacher_quality.pdf Darling-Hammond, L. (1994) The Current Status of Teaching and Teacher Development in the United States Washington: National Commission on Teaching —(2006) Powerful Teacher Education San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. DeGiacomo, J. A. (2002) ‘Experiential learning in higher education’ The Forestry Chronicle 78 (2) 245–47 Dobbins, R. (1993) Current Trends in Teacher Education Practicum Programs. Paper presented at the 5th National Practicum Conference, Sydney Ewing, R. A. and Smith, D. L. (2003) ‘Retaining quality beginning teachers in the profession’ English Teaching: Practice and Critique 2 (1) 15–32 Fullan, M. (1997) ‘Emotion and hope: constructive concepts for complex times’ in Hargreaves, A. ed. ASCD Yearbook: Rethinking Educational Change with Heart and Mind (Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development) Gaffey, C. and Dobbins, R. (1996) ‘Tertiary teacher educators: do they make a difference in practicum’ PEPE Monograph No. 1, 105–22 Giroux, H. A. (2005) ‘Border Crossings: Cultural Workers and the Politics of Education’ New York: Routledge Goodlad, J. I. (1988) ‘School–university partnerships for educational renewal: rationale and concepts’ in Sirotnik, K. A. and Goodlad, J. I. (eds) School– University Partnerships in Action: Concepts, Cases and Concerns New York: Teachers College Press pp. 3–31 Gu, Q. and Day, C. (2007) ‘Teachers resilience: a necessary condition for effectiveness’ Teaching and Teacher Education 23, 1302–16



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

217

Guyton, E. and McIntyre, D. J. (1990) ‘Student teaching and school experiences’ in Houston, W. R. ed. Handbook of Research on Teacher Education London: Macmillan Hammond, C. and Churchman, D. (2008) ‘Sustaining academic life; a case for applying principles of social sustainability to the academic profession’ International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 9 (3) 235–45 Hargreaves, A. (1994) ‘Restructuring – beyond collaboration’ in Changing Teachers, Changing Times: Teachers’ Work and Culture in the Postmodern Age London: Cassell —(1998) ‘The emotional practice of teaching’ Teaching and Teacher Education 14 (8) 835–54 Hastings, W. (2008) ‘I feel so guilty: emotions and subjectivity in school-based teacher education’ Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 14 (5–6) 497–513 Isenbarger, L. and Zembylas, M. (2006) ‘The emotional labour of caring in teaching’ Teaching and Teacher Education 22, 120–34 Jordan, J. (2006) ‘Relational resilience in girls’ in Goldstein, S. and Brooks, R. (eds) Handbook of Resilience in Children New York: Springer Kruger, T., Davies, A., Eckersley, B., Newell, F. and Cherednichenko, B. (2009) Effective and Sustainable University–School Partnerships, Beyond Determined Efforts by Inspired Individuals, Teaching Australia, Canberra Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Le Cornu, R. (2008) The changing role of the ‘university supervisor’ in professional experience. Refereed paper presented at the Australian Teacher Education Association conference, 8–11 July, Gold Coast —(2009a) ‘Building resilience in pre-service teachers’ Teaching and Teacher Education 25, 717–23 —(2009b) Crossing Boundaries: Challenges of Academics Working in Professional Experiences, Australian Teacher Education Association Conference, 28 June–1 July, Albury —(2010) ‘Changing roles, relationships and responsibilities in changing times’ Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 38 (3) 195–206 —(2011) School co-ordinators: essential partners in professional experiences, Australian Teacher Education Association Conference, 3–6 July, Melbourne Le Cornu, R. and Ewing, R. (2008) ‘Reconceptualising professional experiences in pre service teacher education . . . reconstructing the past to embrace the future’ Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (7) 1799–812 Lefever-Davis, S., Johnson, C. and Pearman, C. (2007) ‘Two sides of a partnership: egalitarianism and empowerment in school–university partnerships’ Journal of Educational Research 100 (4) 204–10 Martin, S., Snow, J. and Torrez, C. (2011) ‘Navigating the terrain of third space: tensions with/in relationships in school–university partnerships’ Journal of Teacher Education 62 (3) 299–311 Martinez, K. (2004) Main Issues (Perennial and Emerging) in Practical Experience in Professional Education. Keynote address at the Practical Experiences in Professional Education Conference, Brisbane, February McIntyre, D. (1991) ‘The Oxford University model of teacher education’ South Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 19 (2) 117–29

218

International Perspectives on Higher Education

McLaughlin, M. (1997) ‘Rebuilding teacher professionalism in the United States’ in Hargreaves, A and Evans, R. (eds) Beyond Educational Reform: Bringing Teachers Back In Buckingham: Open University Press Meere, P. (1993) Towards Reconceptualising Teacher Education. Paper presented at the Australian Teacher Education Conference, Fremantle Moon, B. (2007) Research Analysis: Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers: A Global Overview of Current Policies and Practices. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation Mule, L. (2006) ‘“Preservice teachers” inquiry in a professional development school context: implications for the practicum’ Teaching and Teacher Education 22, 205–18 Newmann, F. and Wehlage, G. (1995) Successful School Restructuring: A Report to the Public and Educators by the Center on Organisation and Restructuring of Schools. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research Nieto, S. (2003) What keeps teachers going? New York: Teachers College Press Parliament of Australia (2007) Top of the Class: Report on the Inquiry into Teacher Education. Canberra: House of Representative Standing Committee on Education and Vocational Training Peters, J. (1997) Teachers learning through school/university partnerships: pinnacles and pitfalls. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, Brisbane, 30 November–4 December —(2001) Professional Development for New Times. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, Perth Ramsey, G. A. (2000) Quality Matters: Revitalising Teaching: Critical Times, Critical Choices: Report of the Review of Teacher Education, New South Wales, Sydney, NSW Department of Education and Training Smyth, J., Down, B. and McInerney, P. (2008) ‘“Hanging in with kids” in tough times’ School of Education, University of Ballarat Vick, M. (2006) “‘It’s a difficult matter”: historical perspectives on the enduring problem of the practicum in teacher preparation’ Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 34 (2) 181–98 Wenger, E. (1999) Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press White, S., Bloomfield, D. and Le Cornu, R. (2010) Professional experience in new times: issues and responses to a changing education landscape’ Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 38 (3) 181–94 Whitehead, J. and Fitzgerald, B. (2007) ‘Experiencing and evidencing learning through self-study: new ways of working with mentors and trainees in a training school partnership’ Teaching and Teacher Education 23 (1) 1–1 Yeatman, A. and Sachs, J. (1995) Making the Links: A Formative Evaluation of the First Year of the Innovative Links Project Between Universities and Schools for Teacher Professional Development, Murdoch University. Zeichner, K. (1990) ‘Changing directions in the practicum: looking ahead to the 1990s’ Journal of Education for Teaching 16 (2) 105–25 —(1999) Action Research and the Preparation of Reflective Practitioners During the Professional Practicum. A keynote address, Association of PEPE Conference, Christchurch, NZ, January



A Sustainable Model for Experiential Learning

219

—(2005) ‘Becoming a teacher educator: a personal perspective’ Teaching and Teacher Education 21, 117–24 —(2010) ‘Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college and university based teacher education’ Journal of Teacher Education 61 (1–2) 89–99

Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education Trevor Kerry with ‘Emma’ If the reader has persevered with the volume this far, then he/she will have pursued the arguments that been put forward across the chapters, and will have been aware of the range of opinions and approaches represented. He/ she will have noted the almost theological unpicking by Kerry and Kerry; the exploration of new ideas by Sherwood; the candour of Robinson; the historical perspectives of Ngwana and Liu; the quiet pragamatism of Löfgren; the enthusiasm of Kingsley; the studied analysis of Hughes and Tight; the humour of Bacsich; and the careful theorizing of Le Cornu. Throughout, however, the central reality has remained the higher education student. This volume has reviewed some of the most important issues to affect higher education today, in the UK, in Europe and across the world. As it draws to a close, the authors hope that, as well as some answers, they have left open many questions for the reader to ponder within their own circumstances. In drawing the themes together it is, perhaps, appropriate to do two things. The first is to summarize some of these themes. The second will be to ask whether, how and to what extent all the theory about higher education affects the individual student. In Part 1, we looked at issues of ethics, freedom and spirituality. It was suggested by Kerry that, now more than ever, universities need to be seeking ways in which to behave ethically towards their clients – students, staff and tax-payers. Despite the problems that allegedly beset higher education now, identified through concepts like commodification and managerialism, universities need to preserve their place as the conscience of society in debating the great issues, and moving students forward in their understanding of ways in which society can behave justly towards all of its citizens. It has been argued that what matters in little things – the ways staff are addressed, their treatment by the university bureaucracy, the centrality of students in the consultative process, and so on – is simply symptomatic of much bigger ethical dilemmas: the values which are covertly and overtly espoused by individual academics, managers and whole institutions. Watchwords identified in this discussion have included trustworthiness, respect, stewardship and – perhaps most important of all – integrity.



Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

221

From this ethical base Kerry and Kerry drew on the idea of academic freedom to try to examine the role of academics in a twenty-first century university. They argued against the more extreme and illogical statements of the position that academics should be free of all constraint. They posited a view that freedom must not be confused with either unfettered liberty or exemption from accountability. The notion of accountability is, they suggested, fundamental in society; and no individual can be released from his/her personal obligations in a democracy. But they also warned against the ethical erosion caused by the pressures on academics, in every sphere from tutor–student relations to conducting research in commercial contexts. Some of this uncertainty about ethical behaviour and the debate around academic freedom may stem from the huge change that has been witnessed in universities as they have passed from being largely religiously (faith) inspired creations into their now mainly secular nature. Sherwood has been assiduous in pointing up the need many young people feel for spiritual guidance and a means to meet what they see as a spiritual dimension in their lives. Undergraduates come to universities at the most formative, if not the most vulnerable, time of their lives. The role of chaplaincies seems to be growing to meet these needs; but those chaplaincies are being re-defined into multi-faith, perhaps even into non-faith, activities that nonetheless meet a deep-seated spiritual vacuum. Secularism may need a new image not as something non-religious but as something not conventionally religious. While Part 1 raised the philosophical dilemmas, Part 2, in considering the leadership and management of universities and the university experience, began to put some flesh on the bones of the dilemmas in practice. Robinson’s frank account of management at the top of a university college took full account of the sea-changes imposed by political and fiscal tides. She concluded that having the right people in the right configurations is one key to effective management in turbulent times. Honesty is another, though honesty can be a trying exercise. The centrality of students, both to the purpose of the institution and to the process of the debate, was also noted. Ngwana and Liu faced up to the bogey-man of the developing forms of higher education – internationalization and its attendant move to globalization. They developed three strands of thought. First, they examined the historical perspective and found that, while these processes have been at work since before the foundation of formal universities, the twentyfirst century has offered unprecedented potential for their expansion.

222

Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

In the process of globalizing, universities have to make choices about collaboration or competition – choices that affect the ethos and tenor of the institutions. Second, they proposed that universities should examine the values of internationalization and globalization through research on their effects. Third, they opposed the uncritical application of globalization which results in the commodification of universities. Instead they suggested that universities should examine first, the role of the student as a partner or co-constructor of knowledge rather than an agent of the market or client and second, opportunities for students to question trends and become aware of possible alternatives. Löfgren’s work was based in the implementation of globalization as evidenced in the Bologna process. His Scandinavian experience suggested ways in which courses might be made more consistent with the Bologna principles, which provided a measure of reassurance to students. This came about in the first instance through the implementation of Learning Objectives in line with European frameworks. He encouraged all university staff to become life-long learners in the implementation process and in the curriculum-writing and design that this implies. Moving away from the process of curriculum construction, Kingsley examined the management of international learning in practice through the innovative, if not unique, Evansville/Harlaxton collaboration. Here, the emphasis was on student experience rather than on theoretical models, active and interdisciplinary in nature. His approach, it cannot be doubted, moved students to centre-stage. Moving to Part 3, some consideration was given to aspects of learning and teaching. Hughes and Tight re-visited the idea of the knowledge economy. They contrasted the knowledge economy – a largely capitalist, for-profit approach to learning – with the learning society. They decried the ‘ovenready’ graduate, primed for instant employability; and questioned the effect this had on the nature of courses towards those labelled ‘vocational’. They noted that this approach had not captured the hearts and minds of educators in the HE sector. Bacsich gave attention to one of the drivers of learning in the twentyfirst century university – ICT. He noted that issues of whether, and how, to employ technology were multi-dimensional. But at the heart of the outcomes were tutors on the one hand and students on the other. What matters in technology is not the technology but the learning that accrues through it. In this respect he praised the efforts of university libraries in their ability to respond to need. Finally, Le Cornu demonstrated that it is possible to provide professional (vocational) learning in ways that are effective as experiential learning.



Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

223

She used practical examples and research approaches to show that higher education institutions and potential employers can collaborate effectively without losing the fundamental qualities of a learning model. To summarize, in this volume our collection of international authors has argued that it is possible to sustain – albeit against some opposition from outside – an approach to higher education which both remains true to its roots in open-ended learning and research while at the same time meeting the changing demands of society. They have urged that the learning baby is not thrown out with the bathwater of social, political and fiscal change. But they have recognized the appropriateness of at least some of those external demands, and the need to bend to meet them. They have been aware, though, that some institutions have rushed too eagerly into change and that others have been too blindly resistant. What remains to be done, at the end of this review, is to ask the question: does the turbulence which was noted in the Introduction to the book affect the lives of undergraduate students? Even, it must be queried: Does it merely wash over them? If it does affect them: How and to what extent? Space and opportunity prevent us from pursuing this topic in any valid and reliable way: there is no scope here for a research project to investigate this theme. What there is, though, is a final opportunity for this volume to raise question marks in the minds of academics. To this end it was decided to mount a small, random, one-off experiment to try to identify those questions that relate to the relationship between the current theory and reflection on higher education on the one hand, and student experience of it on the other. Were there matches and mis-matches between ‘reality’ and our text? If so, what were they? What questions might they raise in our minds? As this volume moves towards its close, then, it seemed fitting to leave the last words with a very recent graduate. ‘Emma’ was selected at random simply because she was a person known to me who had graduated in the summer of 2011 but with whom I had no professional contact whatsoever; and of whose subject specialism I was completely ignorant. She was asked to set out her thoughts on a range of issues, which she did in a spoken interview on tape. No claim is made for this transcript as research, nor that it is in any sense representative either of all students or of all universities. The intention is a simple one: to raise in the mind of the reader, based on a real experience, questions about whether the reality of higher education meets the theoretical models we are all encouraged to believe in. It is for the reader to judge the areas and the extent of the matches, and of the mis-matches.

224

Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

Emma accessed local schools to the age of 18 in a Midlands city. Her family originated in Hong Kong. She attended a ‘plate glass university’, finishing her degree only weeks before this interview. The institution concerned has a good research record and is well regarded. She has opted to move on, after her graduation, to a similar campus university in another area of the country to take a PGCE in primary education. This is her monologue: ‘My main motivations for going to university were – well, I went to quite a good school and it was the norm. We went through GCSE and then A levels; it was expected we would go on to higher education. My older sister had gone to university through the same route a year before. It was also career related: at school we were told that if we went to university we would get a better job and achieve better in life. ‘Choice of which university to go to was affected by league tables and also by the grade boundaries which were set. Location was important. I always wanted a campus university because I felt safer in a campus. Reputation for the course was also a factor: I chose to read for a BSc in a biologyrelated subject. ‘Arriving at university was a huge shock. It was good socially because it led me to be more independent and I met new people. I didn’t know anyone at all at the beginning, so it was a totally fresh start. I lived on campus in the first year; and met many new people. But academically it was not a very personal experience. I had a five-minute meeting with my personal tutor right at the beginning – after that, if I needed any help or an answer to a query I had to take the initiative to contact him. Apart from the tutor, the other staff were lecturers, but they don’t know your name or who you are. They come in, say what they’re going to say, and breeze out. ‘It was a big shock initially, going from classes of 15 in school, with a close interaction with the teacher; now it was lecture groups of between 50 and a hundred. No one knew who you were. At first one was a bit scared, I felt like a fish out of water; but it helps you to grow up. School prepares you for applying to university, helps with UCAS, and so on – but it doesn’t prepare you for life in a university. You quickly realize that what you do – your work, what you achieve – is for yourself and you are responsible for it. That encourages you to work harder.



Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

225

‘The social side was very good. I met a wide range of people. I met Chinese people: there are not many of them back in my home town. I met students on international courses, across every faculty. We didn’t live with people from our own faculties – so that develops confidence. I have to be honest and say that this was scary, but also exciting. ‘We didn’t get any advice about how to study. We did have three lectures about essay writing; but that was all. When we went to lectures, in year 1, all the biologists regardless of sub-group, did a common course. This was a bit like A level, and gave a broad grounding. In the second year I started to specialize. We had to choose at that point whether we wanted our studies accredited, additionally, by a professional institution related to the National Health Service (NHS). The impression this gave was that we might be better placed for employment later. If one chose the accredited route, after leaving university and working in the NHS, the candidate might have to do one more year or take various top-up courses, and that gains accreditation. In practice, though, no one in my year gained a job in the NHS; so the value of that accreditation potential remains open to question. No one in the year got even a laboratory job with the NHS. ‘There was another issue with the accredited route. The NHS-related modules were taught by NHS staff. But there were a lot of problems with that. The sessions taught by these tutors were given by people whose primary job was in the NHS – and they didn’t have the teaching skills needed. The organization was poor. Topics would shift around and change. A tutor might lecture in week 1 but couldn’t come back to finish the theme until week 8. They didn’t really know how to mark the assignment work. ‘In the course as a whole, some of the lecturers gave handouts, which were useful. They bulleted the key learning points. This enabled you to follow issues up later in your private reading. But a lot of the process is just playing the game. They say you have to do your own research; but it wasn’t until the third year that I really got the hang of how that worked. At A level you get told exactly what you need to learn; and there’s not much more that you need to do except follow the advice. But here it was different: no real advice to follow. By the third year I knew which journals to read, how to study, and how to top up my marks – so one could make real progress.

226

Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

‘Lecturers didn’t appear to have much time to go through everything. Everything in lectures was pretty basic. I’m sure lecturers don’t have much time. But that means everything else had to be done outside lectures. We had lectures every day except for one, when we had laboratory time all day. ‘As a scientist I didn’t have tutorials, I had lab work. I e-mailed my tutor occasionally with queries. The lab work was written up as course-work; in the third year we had our own lab work in a group of four with a specific tutor. ‘I feel I have been quite negative about the course and about university; but on the positive side it did open my eyes to enjoy science. I gained a passion for my subject and university contributed to that. But it still needed some initiative from me. ‘There was a biology society for extra-curricular activity, but it was in its infancy and not very active. There were no science-related societies. I joined a British–Chinese group; and that opened up a circle of friends. I volunteered to be a Welcome Week counsellor in year 2. ‘As for other students, there was a huge spectrum of commitment. People who did poorly in an assignment sometimes became disheartened; and it was very hard to regain momentum. On the other hand, one friend of mine went to no lectures at all – on principle – yet he came away with a first-class degree. Coursework was always a bit weirdly marked – especially essays. We handed in a piece of work, and it came back. No tutorial. No commentary. Sometimes a lecturer would put comments on the assignment; sometimes it just has a numerical mark with no explanation. If you wanted to know more you had to contact the marker. ‘At the end of the course many of us are still mystified. We were all under the impression that people with science degrees would find it easy to get jobs. But that isn’t the case. A lot of my group are looking to do a Master’s before employment. But that’s a lot more money; and no government support – and still no guarantees of employment. On the other hand, all of the social scientists I know have been snapped up into employment. ‘University teaches you maturity and independence; and I would advise those seeking places in higher education to be really confident, to meet



Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

227

as many people as possible. The course did not produce vocational outcomes despite the propaganda to that effect – in my case, it provided a good, general, science course which I ended up pursuing largely for interest rather than vocation. But I think many of my friends, for example in faculties like English, read their subject because that was what interested them; interest was their primary motivation. That wasn’t quite so true of my friend who read architecture: he wanted to work in that field. ‘I don’t think that the trend to managerialism in universities has much effect on university students. During my time, there were some financial cuts. That did bring people together; and there was some militancy about that. As far as the senior managers of universities go, I only saw the Vice Chancellor at graduation; and I didn’t see the Dean of Faculty or the Head of Department during my course either. Most of the teaching was done by lower level staff – demonstrators doing doctorates and teaching for part of their time. ‘I’m not sure the concern for A level grades at admission is all that relevant. I got A, A, C, C. But university is a fresh start. My friend came onto the course through the clearing house system on the back of Ds and Es; but she achieved with first-class honours and the top marks of the year. A level doesn’t tell you anything at all. It’s down to you. ‘I found my degree really open and I had lots of choices; though my friends in English were much more directed. I suppose that they couldn’t just choose just any books to study as staff had to have read them, too. But we were able to use any modern science papers and were encouraged to seek out these kinds of data. Science is always changing: it depends on evidence and we were allowed to use anything that was evidence-based. ‘There were plenty of international students. They paid much more for the courses even than we did. It was in courses like English, with only an hour or two of lectures a week, that this seemed most unjust. Science was heavily taught, with lectures every day and a lot of lab work; social science less so; English was hardly taught at all. ‘Everyone who taught the courses in science was a researcher – that’s why they were there. Lecturing was a just a way of generating income or off-setting part of their fees. They all said that. Because of that they came

228

Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

in, said what they needed to say, and left. Their main priorities were research – they were scientists – research was their passion. ‘Course work marking was one of the big criticisms of the course. Essays were the worst. There were no published criteria for success. The titles were very open; and it was hard to judge what was required. One lecturer might think that the direction was wrong, while another disagreed. There was no consistency, though there was moderation of the marking. ‘As a paying client I don’t think I had much effect on how the course operated. We had a course representative who was supposed to be the voice of the students. We raised a few issues, such as exam timetables and moderation, but not a lot changed. On the marking issue we were told to talk to markers individually if we felt there was a problem. I did that quite a lot. A typical occasion involved an essay assignment for which I queried my mark. The marker said it was very hard to moderate and compare against the other students, as transcripts had been returned so there was no access to them. She re-read my work, and gave me an extra few per cent, but didn’t explain why or write any extra comments on my work. ‘The student union (SU) did a lot of social things – we had a shop and a nightclub; and they said all the profits went back into supporting things for students. But I was not aware of the SU having any effect on the way the university ran – I would say it was largely social. They did take action over tuition fees but there was no feel of political activity on other issues either nationally or within the university.’ Listening to Emma’s monologue after compiling this book left me with a sense of existing in parallel universes. Without a Tardis to convey me from one dimension to the other, this juxta-positioning of two contrary dimensions purporting to describe the same phemonena was disturbing and intellectually troubling. On the positive side, Emma had learned a love of science; and she had been given that greatest of all intellectual qualities: the passion to pursue evidence to get at (greater degrees of) truth. She had gained a passion for research. She had benefited from the core experience of ‘going to university’: finding her feet as an independent adult. She had broadened not just her intellectual but her social horizons, learning tolerance and understanding of others on the way.



Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

229

Stacked up against that were a sense that undergraduates were relatively unvalued: their opinions about their courses apparently counted for little; they were taught other than by the mainstream and most prestigious teachers; and the criteria that determined success in their work – incredibly – remained both a mystery and a bone of contention. One is tempted to remark that many primary school pupils, through their School Councils, have more influence in their institutions than selectively clever undergraduate audiences have in theirs. As far as teaching quality is concerned, in a previous volume (Kerry 2010), Harland and Scaife promoted the idea of junior members of staff being trained in teaching skills – what they called academic apprenticeship. They also noted the reluctance of universities to promote that course of action: ‘academic apprenticeship . . . may remain on the fringes of academia because teaching is of secondary importance in academic practice, especially in research-intensive universities’ (2010: 187). A similar timidity in innovation by universities in a time of change was noted as much as a decade ago by Lynch (2003) who suggested that ‘recent and ongoing changes in the work environment of university educators’ of the kinds described in this volume are, in reality, ‘potential inhibiters of educational innovation’. These observations only scratch the surface of the implications that underpin Emma’s monologue; it remains for the reader to explore the nuances of what she says. So we are left with questions not answers.   1 What are universities doing well?   2 What are they doing badly?   3 How do the theories of higher education relate to what happens on the ground?   4 How can love of learning and research be made increasingly central to what happens in undergraduate programmes?  5 If vocationalism is now a plank of the higher education experience, why is it sometimes incorporated so ineffectually?  6 Why are employers and employers’ organizations so critical of the higher education process but apparently so incompetent to contribute to it effectually?   7 Where is the political joined-up-thinking that links learning to jobs?   8 Have university managers in general become so far divorced from their client group that the running of the organization has become an end in itself?

230

Postscript: Parallel Universes in Higher Education

 9 What form of inter-relation can be forged between a newly defined form of academic freedom suitable for the twenty-first century, and the inevitable and just need for accountability? 10 What constitutes ‘the ethical university’? 11 When will we rid ourselves of the notion that exam performance and achievement at a given moment in time is, for many, any indicator at all of future potential? 12 Universities, or at least departments and faculties, market themselves on the back of prestigious individuals and their performance against national and international criteria. Is it not, then, dishonest if those individuals make little or no contact with the people whom that marketing recruits? 13 Is it fair to conclude that the role of the university is to help undergraduates learn to love learning, learn to become adults, learn to become responsible and thinking citizens, and learn to become productive in society through both employment and personal service? 14 If you accept the premises that underpin the previous question, to what extent does/do the university/universities of which you have experience fulfil those aspirations? The reader can add his or her own questions to this list. Our task has been simply to fuel the debate.

References Harland, T. and Scaife, J. (2010) ‘Academic apprenticeship’ in Kerry, T. (ed.) (2010) Meeting the Challenges of Change in Postgraduate Education London: Continuum, 179–88 Lynch, J. (2003) ‘Promoting innovation in university teaching against the tide of centralised control and institutionalised risk avoidance’. Conference Paper, Australian Association for Research in Education, Auckland, 2003

Index of Names

(NB where papers are jointly authored, only first authors are listed here) Adamson, V. 183, 195 Ainley, P. 16, 17, 19 Åkerlind, G. 56, 66 Altbach, P. 164, 169 Amory, A. 120, 123 Anderson, L. 136, 140 Antikainen, A. 160, 169 Apple, M. 107, 110, 123 Argyris, C. 117–19, 122, 123 Astin, A. 70, 71, 85 Austin, A. 30, 46 Awaya, A. 204, 215 Bacsich, P. 19, 172, 176, 180, 191, 194–5, 220 Badley, G. 54, 61, 62, 66 Baigent, M. 41, 46 Ball, S. J. 13, 19 Barnett, R. 120, 123 Barrow, R. 56, 67 Bastalich, W. 164, 166, 169 Baty, P. 11, 19 Berdahl, R. 58, 67 Berger, P. 70, 85 Berlin, I. 57, 67 Bernstein, B. 107, 123 Bhabba, H. 203, 215 Birtwistle, T. 53, 54, 67 Blight, D. 119, 123 Bloomfield, D. 199, 215 Boje. D. 42, 47 Bonhoeffer, D. 76 Borgman, E. 70, 85 Bourdieu, P. 107, 120, 123 Boudreau, M. 113, 123 Brinkley, I. 162, 166–7, 169 Britzman, D. 202, 215

Brooke, M. 111, 123 Bryman, A. 102, 105 Bruner, J. 202, 215 Bullough, R. 198, 216 Bullough, S. 201, 215, 216 Callan, H. 113, 123 Campbell, A. 122, 123 Campbell, E. 26, 38, 47 Cardini, A. 208, 216 Carnoy, M. 110, 123 Carroll, J. 193,196 Carr-Saunders, A. 77, 85 Castells, M. 110, 112–13, 123 Cave, P. 38, 47 Chad, K. 183, 195 Chambers, G. 200, 216 Chandler, C. 186, 196 Chandler, S. 71, 85 Chau, M. 107, 123 Chickering, A. 181, 196 Cicero 59 Clandinin, J. 199, 214–16 Clegg, S. 13, 20 Cochran-Smith, M. 201, 216 Cohen, M. 118, 124 Coleman, J. 11, 20 Collins, J. 102- 5 Corbyn, Z. 55, 67 Crisp, R. 25, 47 Daniel, S. 109, 111, 124 Darling-Hammond, L. 199, 202, 216 Davis, C. 29, 47 Dearing, Sir Ron 116, 123, 173, 176, 194, 196 Deem, R. 13, 20

232

Index of Names

DeGiacomo, J. 198, 216 Denifle, H. 53, 67 De Wit, H. 108–9, 119, 124 Dobbins, R. 201, 206, 216 Docking, J. 30, 47 Dos Santos, S. 119, 124 Edvardsson Stiwne, E.131, 140 Elton, L. 13, 20, 29, 42, 47, 64, 67 Erhardsson, M. 136–8, 140 Ewing, R. 199, 202, 207–8, 216 Farquhar, R. 117, 119, 124 Franke, S. 130, 141 Franz, N. 27, 47 Frick, W. 43, 47 Fullan, M. 212, 216 Fuller, R. 71, 85 Fuller, S. 53, 55, 60, 66–7 Gaffey, C. 206, 216 Galindo-Ruada, F. 2, 20 Garner, R. 96,105 Garrison, S. 43, 47 Geraldo, J. 133–4, 141 Gibbins, J. 33, 47 Giroux, H. 214, 216 Goldacre, B. 63, 67 Goodlad, J. 201,216 Gove, M. 16 Grable, J. 55, 67 Gu, Q. 200, 212, 216 Guyton, E. 206, 217 Halliday, F. 114–16, 124 Halsey 110, 124 Hamilton, N. 37, 47 Hammond, C. 199, 200, 202, 216–17 Harding, A. 163, 170 Hargreaves, A. 200, 210, 216 Harland, T. 229, 230 Hastings, W. 200, 217 Hayes, D. 51, 61, 67 Heelas, P. 71,85 Held, D. 113, 116, 124 Hoye, W. 52–3, 67 Hughes, C. 157–9, 165, 168, 170, 220

Hugill, B. 37, 47 Hyland, S. 60, 67 Isenbarger, L. 200, 217 Ivie, R. 54, 55, 67 Jama, D. 160, 170 Jarvis, P. 160, 164, 170 Jenkins, R. 192, 196 Jessop, B. 163, 170 Johnston, D. 110, 124 Jongbloed, B. 189, 196 Jordan, J. 208–9, 211, 217 Jung, I. 190, 196 Kant, I. 53 Karran, T. 6, 20, 52–3, 67 Kerry, C. 11, 18, 20 Kerry, T. 4, 11, 18, 20, 106–7 Khaled, A. 29, 47 Knight, J. 11, 20 Kok, S. 55, 67 Kolb, D. 117, 124 Kruger, T. 208–9, 213, 215, 217 Lall, S. 114, 124 Lamont, C. 46–7 Lave, J. 202, 217 Le Cornu, R. 19, 200, 202, 206–8, 210, 214, 217, 220, 222 Lee, S. 113, 124 Lefever-Davis, S. 215, 217 Light, G. 120, 124 Litzky, B. 46–7 Löfgren, K. 6, 19–20, 220, 222 Lorenz, C. 6, 20 Lynch, J. 229, 230 Lynch, K. 10, 20 Mandelson, P. 7 Marler, P. 71, 85 Marginson, S. 115–16, 120, 124, 163–4, 170 Martin, I. 61, 67 Martin, S. 210, 214–15, 217 Martinez, K. 205, 217 Mason, R. 117, 123–4



Index of Names

Masschelein, J. 160, 170 Maton, S. 173, 196 McBurnie, G. 117, 124 McCall Smith, A. 6, 20 McCluskey, N. 29, 48 McCoy, C. 72, 85 McIntyre, D. 206, 212, 217 McLaughlin, M. 203, 218 Meere, P. 202, 218 Mill, J. S. 59, 67 Mohrman, K. 165, 170 Molesworth, M. 10, 20 Moon, B. 199, 218 Mulderrig, J. 164, 170 Mule, L. 202, 218 Naidoo, R. 119–20, 125 Neave, G. 15, 20, 108, 125 Newmann, F. 210, 218 Ngwana, T. 19, 108, 122, 125, 220, 221 Nieto, S. 211, 218 Nixon, E. 10, 21 Nixon, J. 53–4, 67 Noble, D. 30, 47 Novotny, T. 29, 48 Nybom, T. 6, 21 Orr, D. 36, 48 Owen, J. 40, 48 Ozga, J. 164, 170 Paechter, C. 28, 48 Pedersen, O. 108–9, 125 Peters, J. 203, 218 Porter, A. 7, 21 Purcell, K. 163, 168, 170 Rao, K. 71, 85 Ramsey, G. 199, 204, 218 Ranson, S. 159–61, 171 Rashdale, H. 77, 85 Reynolds, D. 5, 21 Richardson, V. 37, 48 Riley, K.A. 30, 48 Rittel, H. 90, 105 Roberts, P. 119–21, 125 Robertson, S. 110, 125

233

Robinson, S. 110, 125 Rochford, F. 51, 54, 68 Rorty, R. 64, 68 Rowlands, I. 186, 196 De Russy, C. 37, 48 Sadlak, J. 116–17, 125 Saucier, G. 71, 85 Schnieders, S. 70, 85 Schwab, K. 113, 125 Scott, A. 163, 171 Scott, P. 26, 48, 108, 110, 119, 125 Selwyn, N. 160, 171 Sen, A. 114, 117, 125 Sherwood, T. 18, 72, 74–7, 80, 85, 220–1 Smith, C. 72, 86 Smith, M. 161, 171 Smyth, J. 199, 209, 218 Somerville, M. 26, 48 Sparrow, A. 39, 48 Stark, C. 45, 48 Starrat, R. 26, 48 Stendahl, K. 69, 86 Stevens, M. 58, 68 Stewart, D. 42, 48 Stiglitz, J. 114, 117, 125 Stokes, H. 78, 86 Strain, M. 157, 159, 161, 171 Stringer, M. 39, 48 Tacey, D. 71, 76, 86 Tayler, M. 32, 48 Thody, A. 63, 67 Thorens, J. 52, 68 Tight, M. 157, 159, 165, 168, 171, 220 Tsuruta, Y. 117, 125 Van Mill, D. 57, 68 Van Weert, T. 163, 171 Vick, M. 201, 218 Voegtle, E. 11, 21 Walby, S. 163, 171 Watson, D. 19, 21 Waterman, S. 54, 68 Watling, S. 65, 68

234 Watson, D. 89–105 Welch, A. 116, 126 Wells, H. G. 1, 21 Wenger, E 202, 212, 217–18 White, S. 202, 218 Whitehead, J. 209, 218 Wilcox, J. 31, 37, 45, 48 Willetts, D. 16–17 Wilson, D. 119, 126

Index of Names Woodhead, C. 37 Wotjas, O. 41, 48 Yeatman, A. 201, 218 Young, M. 107, 110, 126 Zeichner, K. 199, 203, 206, 209, 212–14, 218 Zinnbauer, B. 70, 86

Index academy 62, 64, 172, 174, 192 accountability 42, 58–9, 63, 66, 120, 163, 199, 221 Age of Enlightenment 52–3 apprenticeship, academic 229 assessment 127–40,226 autonomy 29, 52, 58, 59 benefactors 33, 40 Blair, Tony 1, 4, 7, 30, 164 Bologna 6, 9, 11, 19, 52, 127–40, 222 Brown, Gordon 5, 7 bureaucratization 9, 14–15, 134, 220 chaplain 18, 39, 69, 71–2, 77–85, 221 collegiality 13–14 commodification 6, 9, 12, 28, 30, 120, 122, 220 corporatization 9, 15 curriculum 127–40 democracy 53, 62, 159–60, 221 democratic agora 61, 62, 66 Department for Business, Industry & Skills 7, 28, 63 devolution 5, 63 economic development 110–11 ECTS 128, 131–2, 139 Emma 223–8 e-learning 172–95 equal opportunities 3, 168 ethical complexity 26 principles 25–6, 29, 32–3, 34, 42 ethics Code of 35, 82 in HE 12, 18, 25–47, 220 ethnicity 7 European Higher Education Area 127–9, 139–40

faith 26, 45–6, 69–85, 221 fees university 5, 16–17, 57, 63, 92–3, 95–7, 99, 103, 116, 175, 188, 221 freedom academic 18, 30, 34, 50–66, 220–1, 230 GATS 111, 114 globalization 6, 9, 16, 19, 106–23, 142, 163, 164–6, 199, 221–2 Government Coalition 7, 8 control of HE 28–32, 94, 200 Harlaxton model of learning 142–54 HE access to 2–3 administration in 42–3, 55 leadership of 89–104, 117, 221 management of 19, 33, 38–40, 61, 89–104, 116–17, 180–1, 221 politicization of 55 quality in 198–91 targets in 30 Higher Education Academy 62 HEFCE 91, 95, 100 Humboldt, Wilhelm von 54, 163 hyperglobalizers 113 internationalization 19, 106–23, 142, 183–4, 199, 221 knowledge economy 157–69 league tables 10–11, 38, 93, 119, 165, 224 learning 19, 31, 90, 106, 108, 117, 121–2, 158, 160, 198–213

236 Index learning communities 200, 202–3, 205–11, 213–15 distance 173, 175, 179–80, 183–5, 191, 194 double-loop 118–19 experiential 198–213, 222 extra-curricular 226 inter-disciplinary approaches 151 international 142–54 lifelong 139, 148, 160, 165, 222 objectives 128, 131–2, 134–9, 222 partnerships 205–6 technology 65, 161, 166, 172–95, 222 learning society nine principles of 162, 122 liberty 50, 53, 57–61, 63 libraries 42, 147, 153, 182–3 London School of Economics 40 managerialism 9, 13–14, 18, 25, 55, 64, 93, 220, 227 marketization 9–10, 12, 35, 41–2, 64, 111, 114–15, 187–8 massification 2, 9, 11, 25 Master of Teaching 203, 207–8 mediatization 9, 15–16 mentor 204–14 morale 33, 38, 98, 100, 199 morality 45, 161 multi-culture 26 multi-faith 69, 79–85, 221 National Curriculum 9, 32 National Health Service 225 neo-liberalism 115–16, 119–21, 164 Oxbridge 2–3, 66 performance indicators 30 plagiarism 37, 40, 178, 192 policy discourse 157 political correctness 25, 45–6, 56 privatization 7, 9, 16–17, 172

quality 33, 43–4, 66, 90 RAE 39 REF 39 regionalization 113, 163, 194 religion 69–85, 153 typology of attitudes 72–5 research 33, 40–1, 51, 63–4, 117, 120, 122–3, 130, 133, 139, 147, 184–7, 223–5, 227–8 risk management 101, 104 SBNR 71,75 schools independent 2–3, 175 secularization 69–71, 221 social class 7 society inclusive 12, 160 soceo-economic change 158, 164 spirituality 18, 69–85,165, 220–1 strategic plan 100–1 Students’ Union 5, 32, 228 subjects traditional 4 Sutton Trust 2, 3 Teacher Development Agency 28 teacher education initial 198–213 teacher workshops 135–7 teaching 19, 25, 37–8, 51, 60, 90, 94, 100, 106–7, 117, 119–22, 143, 200 university historical emergence of 109 vocationalism 4, 7, 13, 31, 229 Virtual Learning Environment 178, 183, 185–7, 195 wicked issues 89–104