Universities with a Social Purpose: Intentions, Achievements and Challenges (Sustainable Development Goals Series) 9819989604, 9789819989607

Citation preview

Connecting the Goals

Kerry Shephard V. Santhakumar

Universities with a Social Purpose Intentions, Achievements and Challenges

Sustainable Development Goals Series

The Sustainable Development Goals Series is Springer Nature’s inaugural cross-imprint book series that addresses and supports the United Nations’ seventeen Sustainable Development Goals. The series fosters comprehensive research focused on these global targets and endeavours to address some of society’s greatest grand challenges. The SDGs are inherently multidisciplinary, and they bring people working across different fields together and working towards a common goal. In this spirit, the Sustainable Development Goals series is the first at Springer Nature to publish books under both the Springer and Palgrave Macmillan imprints, bringing the strengths of our imprints together. The Sustainable Development Goals Series is organized into eighteen subseries: one subseries based around each of the seventeen respective Sustainable Development Goals, and an eighteenth subseries, “Connecting the Goals”, which serves as a home for volumes addressing multiple goals or studying the SDGs as a whole. Each subseries is guided by an expert Subseries Advisor with years or decades of experience studying and addressing core components of their respective Goal. The SDG Series has a remit as broad as the SDGs themselves, and contributions are welcome from scientists, academics, policymakers, and researchers working in fields related to any of the seventeen goals. If you are interested in contributing a monograph or curated volume to the series, please contact the Publishers: Zachary Romano [Springer; zachary.romano@ springer.com] and Rachael Ballard [Palgrave Macmillan; rachael.ballard@ palgrave.com].

Kerry Shephard • V. Santhakumar

Universities with a Social Purpose Intentions, Achievements and Challenges

Kerry Shephard Higher Education Development Centre University of Otago Dunedin, New Zealand

V. Santhakumar Azim Premji University Bengaluru, India

ISSN 2523-3084     ISSN 2523-3092 (electronic) Sustainable Development Goals Series ISBN 978-981-99-8959-1    ISBN 978-981-99-8960-7 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore Paper in this product is recyclable.

Preface

Of course universities have social purposes! Everything that a university does is, in its way, in support of the society that sponsors it and of the progress of humanity. Universities teach the students who will take up important roles in society. University teaching makes people more fulfilled citizens. Universities undertake the research upon which the economic, social and environmental prospects of societies depend, and provide a place within which people can interact and benefit for these purposes. Universities provide a source of knowledge and skills upon which many depend. And universities provide a conduit between nations so that advances in one can disseminate throughout the world. Even the most academic of topics studied at our universities enriches humanity. Of course universities have a social purpose! Social purpose is everything to the idea of a university. A book about the social purpose of universities is really a book about universities, and there are plenty of them on our universities’ bookshelves already. On the other hand, and despite our appreciation for all the good that our universities do, we live in a world that desperately needs its universities to fulfil their social purpose. The social, economic and environmental circumstances of many of our nations are far from satisfactory, by any measure, and on a planetary scale humanity has much to fret about. Whether we use the internationally agreed 17 sustainable development goals or the evidence of our own eyes, this much is clear. What is less clear is what, precisely, our universities might be able to do about these things. Are they not already very busy doing everything they can do? Might they be simply encouraged or enabled to attend to their social purpose better than they do at present? How well do we understand the social purpose of universities and how this interacts with whatever other purposes universities have? Our book is an account of conversations between two professors, with different backgrounds, academic disciplines, life experiences and from different continents. Their research has brought them to a single destination defined by a mutual interest in the social purpose of universities and a hope in common that their academic efforts will somehow do good in the world. That Santha and Kerry come from different parts of the world, representing nations with different degrees of development, and likely different trajectories into the future, is also central to this book. Aotearoa New Zealand has about five million people and eight universities. The United Kingdom has about 68 million people and about 160 universities. Although geographically in the Pacific, Aotearoa New Zealand cannot quite decide whether it belongs v

vi

there, or with much of the English-speaking world in the Northern Hemisphere. The UK is similarly undecided about its links to Europe, and even about how united it wishes to remain. Both populations are stable or declining. India is home to 1.4 billion people, many relatively young, and has more than 1000 universities. India is not without its problems, but it is clear about its geo-­ political status in the world and about its democratic underpinning as the largest democracy in the world. People in Aotearoa New Zealand and the UK might not appreciate it, but on a planetary level, and in the context of the sustainable development goals, what happens in these small nations may prove to be somewhat less important than what happens in India. If the more-­ developed nations know something about the social purposes of universities, they had better share it with the less-developed nations, and hope that they are still in a position to learn themselves. Santha and Kerry have been conversing, by email and videoconference, since 2019. Neither has managed to entirely convince the other yet, although they do reach some mutually acceptable conclusions at the end of the book. Our book is in three parts. Part I Chapter 1 Prologue. Our book starts with an extended narrative by Santha on the social purposes of universities informed by his experiences in India and in other developing nations. This narrative is designed to introduce to readers the challenges that our book attempts to analyse and to the context within which such an analysis can operate. It establishes the need for our book and guides its structure and its aims. Our prologue also confirms the nature of our book as a conversation. The other author, Kerry, draws on Santha’s claims, hopes and disappointments, responds to them, and suggests how the book needs to address them. Although conversational elements are less apparent in some other parts of the book, every chapter has been developed, and redeveloped, in extended conversation. Chapter 2 builds on the guidance of our prologue in providing some case studies of social purpose in progress, and descriptions of the educational systems that they exist in. Chapter 2 also explores the nature of knowledge in the context of social purposes, what counts as knowledge in this domain, and how knowledge claims can be considered and critiqued. The authors hope that at the end of this chapter, readers will have acquired a good understanding about what social purposes are and the claims that the institution of higher education makes about them. Part II Part II seeks to bring together the ideas developed so far, to explore in detail the challenges in seeking social purpose inherent to particular facets of higher education’s operation. It includes five chapters on participation, teaching, research, community engagement and on the principal aim of higher education in some settings, the development of intellectual independence. Each chapter addresses recent research in the context of education for sustainable development or for social purpose, limitations or barriers to implementation, and learning from institutions with specific purposes. Part II also explores if some of the items on our universities’ ‘to do’ list are simply mutually incompatible. Perhaps out of respect for our sponsoring societies, or pressure from

Preface

Preface

vii

them, we have added some items to our ‘to do’ list that really do not belong there, given our prior history and proven abilities. Academic freedom, in particular, may not be entirely compatible with the ever-increasing list of things to do presented to universities nowadays. Intellectual independence and critical thinking may not be completely well-matched with the range of outcomes espoused by governments, academic boards and professions. Universities’ first and second missions, teaching and research, may always struggle to accommodate the third mission of community engagement. And institutional advancement, competition or survival, produces behavioural drivers that eclipse many of those in pursuance of our social purpose. Our task in this context is to better understand our diverse roles and to use the power of our analysis to determine the extent to which university roles can be universal, and perhaps to endorse calls for greater specialisation. Part III And then we have the almost unmentionable possibility that universities, arguably the greatest tribute to the humanity of humankind, have become the means whereby societies seek to maintain their own values and ways of working; hegemonic devices set on reproducing social inequalities and national advantages. Rather than solving the problems of the world, our universities reproduce them. Our task in this context is to ask difficult questions and to discover possibilities for change. Part III’s Chap. 8 explores possibilities for re-inventing the university, in the context of social purpose. It addresses changes that need to be undertaken in order for our social purposes to be achieved, either with all institutions or with institutions with a specific social purpose, and whether we should develop processes relating to our specific purposes or focus on our existing commitments to promote intellectual independence. These are governance issues, but at their heart they are also evaluation or assessment issues. Santha and Kerry attempt to reconcile their differences in the Epilogue and consider if it is enough to critique higher education and its contributions to social justice, or if we need to take a stand. Dunedin, New Zealand

Kerry Shephard

Bengaluru, India 

V. Santhakumar

Acknowledgements

Kerry acknowledges the contributions that many wonderful academic colleagues have made over many years to the ways in which he sees the world of higher education and understands it. Conversing and researching with you all has been a great privilege. Kerry thanks the University of Otago wholeheartedly. The University of Otago has provided him with the opportunity to undertake the research that has led to this book and to collaborate with Santha, the academic freedom to ensure that his work will contribute to the international public debate on higher education, and the expectation that he will make his findings and viewpoints known widely. Kerry emphasises that any points of view expressed by him in the pages that follow are his own, and not necessarily those of his employer, the University of Otago. Santhakumar acknowledges the enabling environment of the Azim Premji University that helped him to co-author this book. This book would not have been written if he were not part of the university. It enabled him to observe, experiment with and reflect on the idea of a university for a specific social purpose. However, his association with other people and organisations during his younger days also shaped his thinking on issues relevant to the book, and it has also contributed to his experience and activism which are reflected in this book. More specifically, his association with the Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) and M P Parameswaran (MP) during 1986–1992 played an important role in this regard. KSSP and MP were at the forefront of using science for social change, but also played an important role in enhancing literacy in India as a whole. Santhakumar might have internalised the idea that education/knowledge can be used for a direct positive change in society from his association with MP and KSSP.

ix

Contents

1 Prologue:  Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific Social Purposes, and a Response ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������   1 1.1 Limitations of Conventional Universities in Meeting Specific Social Purposes and the Roots of the Desire to Have Universities with Social Purposes ������������������������������   1 1.1.1 Conventional Universities are Elitist, or Those Which Meet the Needs of Elites��������������������   1 1.1.2 The Perception That Conventional Universities are Inadequate to Meet Certain Social Needs ��������������   2 1.1.3 The Persistence of Poverty and Underdevelopment ������������������������������������������������   3 1.1.4 Persistence of Marginalised Social Groups and Their Need for Higher Education��������������������������   4 1.2 Universities with Social Purpose: Different Examples������������   5 1.3 Should There Be Universities for Social Purposes? What About Other Institutes?����������������������������������������������������   6 1.4 Socioeconomic Challenges of the Universities with Specific Social Purposes ��������������������������������������������������   7 1.5 Idea Versus Implementation������������������������������������������������������   7 1.6 Inadequate Resources����������������������������������������������������������������   9 1.7 Lower Private Returns from Education for Social Purposes and the Consequent Challenges��������������������������������  10 1.8 Who May Seek Admission in Universities with a Social Purpose?��������������������������������������������������������������  11 1.9 Who Becomes Teachers in Universities with a Social Purpose?��������������������������������������������������������������  12 1.10 Homogenisation of the World Economy and the Consequent Homogenisation of Education������������������  13 A Response and Suggestions for the Structure of Our Book������������  14 Reference��������������������������������������������������������������������������������   17 References������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  17 2 Universities  and Their Social Purpose ������������������������������������������  19 2.1 Purposes of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Education and What Distinguishes University Education ������������������������  19 2.1.1 Educational Sectors������������������������������������������������������  19 xi

Contents

xii

2.1.2 Diversity of Higher Education in the UK, New Zealand and India in the Twenty-First Century������������  20 2.2 The Idea of a University������������������������������������������������������������  24 2.2.1 The Idea of an Undergraduate Degree, Intellectual Independence and Social Purpose��������������  26 2.3 Theoretical Underpinnings for the Analysis of Social Purpose����������������������������������������������������������������������  27 2.4 Case Studies of Social Purpose in Action ��������������������������������  30 2.4.1 On Widening Participation in Higher Education Institutions in England��������������������������������  30 2.4.2 How Is India’s New Education Policy Attempting to Address the Challenges in India’s Education?��������������������������������������������������������������������  31 2.4.3 Addressing Treaty of Waitangi Obligations and Demographic Inequities in Aotearoa New Zealand ����������������������������������������������������������������  33 2.5 Conclusions������������������������������������������������������������������������������  35 References������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  35 3 Participation,  Social Mobility and Social Purpose������������������������  37 3.1 Higher Education and Social Stratification������������������������������  37 3.2 Societal Ambitions to Widen Participation ������������������������������  38 3.3 Causes of Higher Education Elitism ����������������������������������������  39 3.4 Some Philosophical Considerations������������������������������������������  40 3.5 How Societies and Universities Are Seeking to Widen Participation in Higher Education ����������������������������  41 3.5.1 Positive Discrimination������������������������������������������������  42 3.5.2 Addressing the Costs of Widening Participation����������  43 3.5.3 Systemic Changes within Universities��������������������������  44 3.5.4 Rural Under-Developed Areas, Rural Doctors and Teachers, Bonds and Preferential Selection ����������  45 3.5.5 Which Students Are Adequately Prepared to Participate in our Universities and What Should Universities Expect of Them?��������������������������  46 3.6 Institutions with Special Social Purposes ��������������������������������  48 3.6.1 Participation Trends in India����������������������������������������  48 3.6.2 Early Efforts in Colonial India��������������������������������������  48 3.6.3 Demands by Caste Groups��������������������������������������������  49 3.6.4 Teachers as Participants in Institutions with Specific Social Purposes ��������������������������������������  50 3.7 How Are We Doing So Far?������������������������������������������������������  51 References������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  52 4 Teaching  in Universities and Specific Social Purposes ����������������  55 4.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������  55 4.2 What Kinds of Teaching Would Be Useful for Specific Social Purposes: Historical and Current Educational Research and Development on Teaching for Social Justice������  55

Contents

xiii

4.3 What ‘Meaningful Education’ Means in the Context of Universities’ Social Purposes ����������������������������������������������  58 4.4 Some Examples of Teaching and Learning Programmes that Address Specific Social Purposes��������������������������������������  60 4.4.1 Conventional Universities and Category B Students ��������������������������������������������������������������������  60 4.4.2 What Institutions with Specific Social Purposes Are Attempting�������������������������������������������������������������  62 4.4.3 Category A: Teaching Disciplines to Understand the Real Life of Students����������������������������������������������  62 4.4.4 Category A and B Students: Testing the Ability to Apply the Knowledge ����������������������������������������������  63 4.4.5 Category C Students: Education Programs to Address Local Issues������������������������������������������������  65 4.4.6 Category A, B and C Students: Teaching Courses with a Specific Social Purpose��������������������������������������  67 4.5 So, How Well Are Universities Managing to Address Their Social Purposes?��������������������������������������������������������������  69 4.5.1 Research Approaches to Measure Change��������������������  69 References������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  70 5 Research  in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose��������������������������������������������������������������������������  73 5.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������  73 5.2 Traditional Drivers for University Research and Their Links to Social Purpose��������������������������������������������  74 5.2.1 Research on Generalisable Insights and Its Usefulness for Specific Social Purposes ����������  74 5.2.2 Ideology and Research for Social Purposes������������������  75 5.2.3 Research in Conventional Universities Is Often Driven by the Need for Theory ������������������������������������  75 5.2.4 What Determines Desirable Research Within Disciplines and Between Disciplines?��������������������������  76 5.2.5 Quantitative Research Paradigms Dominate Some Research Fields But Limit the Research Questions That Can Be Asked��������������������������������������  77 5.2.6 What About Consulting by Academics? Does That Help Specific Social Purposes? ������������������  77 5.2.7 Summarising Traditional Drivers for University Research and Their Links to Social Purpose����������������  78 5.3 Specific Social Purposes and Knowledge Claims��������������������  78 5.3.1 Different Knowledge(s) in Different Contexts?������������  79 5.3.2 Do Specific Social Purposes, in Specific Educational Contexts, Also Involve Nurturing a Knowledge Which Is Different from That of Conventional Universities?������������������������������  81 5.3.3 How Is Knowledge for Specific Social Purposes Valued and Used by Our Universities? ������������������������  82

Contents

xiv

5.4 The Impact Debate and Its Impact on the Social Purposes of Universities������������������������������������������������������������  83 5.5 What Could Be the Nature of Research in Universities with Specific Social Purposes? ������������������������  85 5.5.1 Research to Connect with Practice ������������������������������  86 5.5.2 Using Research Skills for Social Purposes ������������������  87 5.5.3 Research for Specific Social Needs: A Few Examples ����������������������������������������������������������  88 5.6 Conclusions������������������������������������������������������������������������������  89 References������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  89 6 Community  Engagement and Social Purpose ������������������������������  91 6.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������  91 6.2 Service Learning, Internships, Placements and Field-Practice ��������������������������������������������������������������������  92 6.3 Examples and Experience from India ��������������������������������������  94 6.3.1 Internships��������������������������������������������������������������������  94 6.3.2 Developing Links Between University Courses and Field Practice����������������������������������������������������������  95 6.3.3 Successes and Limitations��������������������������������������������  95 6.4 Educational Theorising About Community-Engagement ��������  96 6.4.1 Co-construction of Knowledge and the Boundaries of Disciplinary Knowledge ����������  96 6.4.2 How University People Conceptualise Their CE Activities ����������������������������������������������������������������  97 6.4.3 Service Learning, Community Service, and Changing the World in Your Own Time ����������������  98 6.4.4 Scholarship as a Framework to Understand University Teachers’ Community Engagement������������ 100 6.5 Social Change that Does Not Overtly Benefit from Engagement with Universities, But Perhaps Should���������������� 102 References������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 103 7 Competitive  Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives and Consequences������������������ 105 7.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 105 7.2 What Are Critical Thinking and Intellectual Independence, in Broad Terms?������������������������������������������������������������������������ 107 7.3 How Realistic Is it to Expect our Graduates to Always Think for themselves?�������������������������������������������������������������� 109 7.4 Is Intellectual Independence Context, or Discipline, Specific?������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 110 7.5 What Educational Objectives Might Be Incompatible with Seeking Intellectual Independence as the Principal Aim of Universities? ���������������������������������������������������������������� 110 7.6 Concerns About the Development of Intellectual Independence as the Principal Aim of Universities������������������ 111 7.6.1 Liberalism �������������������������������������������������������������������� 112 7.6.2 Individualism���������������������������������������������������������������� 112

Contents

xv

7.6.3 Cultural and Linguistic Relativism ������������������������������ 113 7.6.4 Positioning Self-Interest, Competitive Individualism, Cooperation and Intellectual Independence���������������������������������������������������������������� 115 7.6.5 Does the Pursuit of Specific Social Purpose Require a Compromise on Intellectual Independence?�������������������������������������������������������������� 116 7.6.6 So, if We Are Serious About the Social Purposes of Universities, What Should We Be Doing About It?������������������������������������������������ 117 A Response from Santha�������������������������������������������������������������������� 117 References������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 120 8 Governance  of Social Purpose�������������������������������������������������������� 123 8.1 Kerry to Santha ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 123 8.2 Santha to Kerry ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 123 8.3 Kerry to Santha ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 124 8.4 Diverse Factors Contribute to the Decisions That Universities Make About What They Teach ���������������������������� 125 8.4.1 Santha to Kerry ������������������������������������������������������������ 125 8.4.2 Kerry to Santha ������������������������������������������������������������ 127 8.5 Teaching Social Purposes May Need Changes in the Way Disciplines are Taught�������������������������������������������� 128 8.5.1 Santha to Kerry ������������������������������������������������������������ 128 8.5.2 Kerry to Santha ������������������������������������������������������������ 129 8.6 Teacher Identity, Development and Progression���������������������� 130 8.6.1 Santha to Kerry ������������������������������������������������������������ 130 8.6.2 Kerry to Santha ������������������������������������������������������������ 131 8.7 What Is to Be Learned and Who Is to Teach It? ���������������������� 134 8.7.1 Santha to Kerry ������������������������������������������������������������ 134 8.7.2 Kerry to Santha ������������������������������������������������������������ 135 References������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 137 9 Epilogue�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 139 9.1 A Brief Summary of the Ideas Developed in This Book���������� 139 9.2 Kerry to Santha ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 139 9.3 Santha to Kerry ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 142 9.4 Kerry to Santha ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 144 9.5 Santha to Kerry ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 147 Index��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  149

About the Authors

V. Santhakumar is a professor at Azim Premji University in India. Santha was born in Kerala and became a civil engineer. While working as a civil engineer on a non-­governmental initiative to plan watershed management in the late eighties, Santha felt the need for a social science education, to help him to transfer the possibilities of engineering improvement to the social well-being of people. After Master’s and Doctoral degrees in social sciences, research analysing and designing mechanisms of governance and the economics of conserving natural resources, Santha’s current focus is on the interlinkages between development and education, and ways to mitigate the ‘development differences’ between population groups. Santha is interested in the impacts of school teachers in remote parts of India, in overcoming the social injustices inherent to the caste system and dowry, and the part played by education in reproducing social injustice and in overcoming it. Santha, always a pragmatist, attempts to persuade Kerry that radical change in most of our universities is not necessary and promotes in particular the development of universities with specific social purposes. Santha is an educational activist by nature. His writing, essentially narratives, reflect his nature and his experiences in India and in the less developed parts of the world.  

Kerry  Shephard is professor of higher-education development at the University of Otago in New Zealand. Kerry has not always been a highereducation specialist or a New Zealander, but has spent most of his adult life at one university or another. He grew up in England and developed an earlier professional identity as an environmental physiologist and university teacher. He acquired a lifelong passion for whatever found its way to his primary school’s nature table and for the ways in which biological systems, including nowadays social systems, work and evolve. His interests developed from environmental science to how to teach these things and led to his discovery that universities teach knowledge and skills well, but struggle to teach students to think critically about what they learn or to be emotionally engaged with it. For more than 20 years, Kerry’s research has focussed on how people develop the personal values and dispositions that guide them through their lives, and the impact that formal education may have on these. Kerry’s contributions to conversations with Santha, and to this book, focus on academic analysis and also on possibilities for universities to embrace the ‘higher’ in higher education; by prioritising the abilities and willingness of all who they  

xvii

xviii

teach to think critically, and not necessarily as prescribed or appreciated by their societies, their future employers, their academic disciplines and their professors. Kerry’s message to universities is to just do what you say you do, but tell us how well you do it and strive to do it better. This shouldn’t require radical change, but probably will. By nature, Kerry is a researcher, and admits that his writing, whilst steeped in academic theory and the research literature, is primarily designed to provoke thought, and analysis, rather than action.

About the Authors

1

Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific Social Purposes, and a Response

1.1 Limitations of Conventional Universities in Meeting Specific Social Purposes and the Roots of the Desire to Have Universities with Social Purposes 1.1.1 Conventional Universities are Elitist, or Those Which Meet the Needs of Elites Higher education may have been historically an elite enterprise (Brennan 2004) and is only transforming gradually to accommodate students from non-elite groups. It was the students from elite sections of society who could afford not only the direct cost of education but also the opportunity cost involved in the sacrifice of time for full-time education in universities/colleges. Since education loans were not available widely in the past, the majority of students who could pursue higher education consisted of those with financial support from parents. Given that the teachers of universities would be people who acquired a higher education, they were also more likely to come from the elite sections of society. There were different kinds of elites in the past and they included landed (feudal) families; cultural or religious elites (or those who were involved in priestly activities); political or ruling families and others who occupied powerful positions in ruling establishments; and economic/trading elites. There is a

close connection between income levels and the use of higher education even currently, which implies the use of more higher education by the economically well-off and such education contributing to their economic affluence (Mayer 2010). This elitism has continued in poorer/ developing countries for a longer period whereas there has been a notable increase in the demand for education from non-elite groups in Europe after World War II (Trow 2005). Even so, higher education is not free from such an elitism even now. There is a perception that this form of elitism has enabled the universities to serve the needs of economic elites or capitalists in the contemporary world. This elitism is reflected not only in the participants (students and teachers) of higher education but also in the institutions, processes and contents of education. There are elite and non-elite universities within many countries and the former spend a much higher amount of financial resources per student and it is much more difficult to get admissions in such universities compared to the latter. This is found to cause not only a high level of educational inequality but also social and economic inequality (Brezis 2016). Competition between institutions encourages poorly endowed universities to catch up with the best but these efforts may not be successful. To some extent, the generalisable and universally valid knowledge that is inculcated in conventional universities is also the reflection of an

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_1

1

2

1  Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific…

elitism. This is so since the livelihood or social interactions in specific contexts (especially in the less developed contexts) need not be directly-­ based on such universally valid knowledge. Such knowledge may be suitable for ‘global workers and citizens’, but such a status may not be aspired to by a substantial section of society in the less developed world. Notably SDG 4.11 does not aspire to a university education for all. Perhaps some proportion from all regions will have a university education, but whether this needs to be targeted to their perceived specific needs, or of universal relevance is an important question. The ranking of universities which is based on a universal model – whereby some are at the top, others are trying to inch up, and many are at the bottom of the ladder  – also leads to processes which are elitist. Those who are more likely to use the top universities come from the elite sections of the global society. Questions of elite institutions and elitism bring to our attention the diversity of institutions, particular roles of universities, and whether all universities have the same social purposes.

1.1.2 The Perception That Conventional Universities are Inadequate to Meet Certain Social Needs Broadly, there are two kinds of higher education. One is a general liberal education, and the other is professional education of doctors, engineers and managers. Given the perceived connection between capitalism and higher education, and their command of various types of capital (scholarly, economic, cultural or social), both these kinds of higher education are perceived to be more appropriate to meet the needs of dominant interests rather than the needs of minorities (Borjesson and Brady 2016). There could be, for example, certain social needs which may require non-conventional interventions in higher education. For example, the universities in Brazil found that their conventional teacher-training programs https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal4

1 

are inadequate to meet the needs of indigenous people, and hence run an additional program to create teachers from and for these people.2 This required a different process and content given the specific needs and challenges of indigenous people. In India, students who pass out of conventional management institutes are likely to take up jobs in well-paying private firms, and hence there is a perceived need for other institutes to create managers for rural or cooperative enterprises. This was the reason for the founding of the Institute of Rural Management, Anand.3 Because all professions have sets of agreed professional values, that need to be taught by professional educators who share particular empathetic attitudes, and as such attitudes may not be instilled in normal universities, some perceive the need for particular professional institutions, such as those for social workers.4 And because there is a perception that professions need to have concern about the un-sustainability of development, the demand for explicit efforts to bring in sustainability concerns in higher education increases and this is proving difficult in conventional settings. There are certain geographical areas, like mountainous regions, where the conventional employment opportunities may not be available to sustain employment for graduates. There may be a need to provide higher education which takes into account the development/employment specificities of these regions. This was one of the purposes of the founding of the University of Central Asia5 by the Agha Khan Foundation. All these may sustain the desire and drive actions towards the creation of universities with specific specialisations as well as specific social purpose.

https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ inter-cultural-education-of-the-indigenous-people-in-­ brazil/ 3  https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ education-for-rural-management-challenges-and-possibilities/ 4  https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ from-an-institute-of-social-work-to-a-university-ofsocial-­sciences-the-evolution-of-tiss/ 5  https://ucentralasia.org/home 2 

1.1  Limitations of Conventional Universities in Meeting Specific Social Purposes and the Roots…

1.1.3 The Persistence of Poverty and Underdevelopment Despite decades of economic growth and governmental efforts to reduce poverty and facilitate human development, substantial sections of people continue to be poor and vulnerable in different parts of the world.6 There are countries which are poor and underdeveloped and there are sizable sections of poor in even those countries where there is notable income growth (and the creation of many millionaires and even billionaires). India is a typical case of the latter type.7 The role of (school) education for poverty reduction and human development is well recognised. However, given the elitist nature of conventional universities, and the perception that these primarily meet the needs of capitalism, there is an apprehension on their adequateness to address the needs of human development and poverty reduction. Moreover, an increase in the direct role of private forprofit capital in higher education, which is a trend in many countries, may be causing a widening of inequality in education and in society (Gelbgiser 2018). There could be different roles for people within higher education in reducing poverty and enhancing human development. For example, there may be a need for well-trained school teachers who can address the educational challenges of children from poorer and underprivileged families.8 The conventional model of teacher-training may not be adequate for this purpose since such a training may not include the ways to address the specific challenges faced by these children.9 There could be a set of development practitioners who attempt to For an interesting account and a different explanation of the persistence of poverty, see Karelis (2008). 7  There are many books and articles on this issue. For example, the articles referenced in Gooptu and Parry (2014). 8  To some extent, this is one reason behind the founding of Azim Premji University 9  There may be a need for interventions not only in school and classroom but also in socioeconomic contexts. Refer, Santhakumar et al. (2016). 6 

3

improve human development in underdeveloped social contexts. They too may need an appropriate higher education but these may not be provided in conventional universities. These could be part of the rationale for thinking about universities with specific social purposes. A section of students from poorer and working-­class families may look for opportunities in higher education. A very small share of them may be able to get admission in conventional universities and may benefit from different schemes which provide financial assistance to such students. However, this may not be adequate to enhance the access to higher education to the majority of such students. Many among them may not get good quality school education and that may reduce their ability to get admission in conventional universities by scoring well in competitive examinations. A section of them may not have adequate information or aspirations to do well in higher education even though they have intrinsic abilities. Moreover, they may not be able to fit well with the structures and processes in conventional universities. For example, spending 3–4  years in colleges without participating in livelihood activities may be too costly for such students. There may be a need to change the processes of college/universities if such students are also to be provided higher education. There could be a demand for certain types of courses among these students. For example, those which may enhance their employment prospects after an undergraduate degree may be preferred by a section of these students since they may not be able to go for higher levels of higher education or may not be able to give that much focus on the non-­instrumental purposes of education. All these may require fine-tuning higher education to meet the needs of these students. The ‘widening participation’ project in the UK is a particular example of such an objective, focused primarily on addressing participation from an equity perspective. Addressing issues of poverty from other perspectives may require targeting the development of particular populations.

4

1  Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific…

1.1.4 Persistence of Marginalised Social Groups and Their Need for Higher Education There are different marginalised social groups in different countries. Lower castes in India are known examples. Indigenous people who faced challenges in those contexts where they encountered western cultures could be another category. There can be similar challenges faced by indigenous people in their encounter with non-western populations as in the case of India, Philippines, Nepal, and so on. Those who follow minority religions may be experiencing different kinds of marginalisation or oppression in different societies. Those who follow Islam in the Xinjiang province of Western China and the followers of Hinduism and Buddhism in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh seem to face such a situation. There are apprehensions on the rights of religious minorities in India too. Suppressed ethnicities or regional groups are also not uncommon. Tamils in Sri Lanka, Tibetans in China, Rohingya population in Myanmar are known examples of this kind. People who live in specific territories like the Himalayas or Pamir Mountains face specific challenges. It is not that this marginalisation is neglected by the policy makers of education. There were efforts in almost all countries to extend conventional education to the marginalised groups within the country. This can be through one or other kind of reservation or quota or special consideration in admission policies. This could ensure the access to higher education to a subsection of students coming from different marginalised groups. However, there are challenges for the majority of students from these groups. Some of these students may face diverse kinds of problems in accessing school education (Santhakumar et al. 2016), and hence they may not be able to access higher education even if there are special provisions. (Thus, the enrolment in higher education for some of these groups may be significantly lower than that of

the mainstream population or dominant section.) Even when students from marginalised social groups get school education, the learning achievements (based on standard test scores) may not be that high (Santhakumar et  al. 2016). This may impact not only their access but also performance (again based on standard measures) in higher education. This poorer performance can also lead to frustrations and psychological problems on the campuses. However, the most serious problem is that the mainstream higher education in each country may not take into account the history and life experience of these marginalised groups. Regarding the situation of lower castes in India, the following viewpoints have been recorded: “We are bothered about the declining awareness among our children about their own cultural backgrounds”. “Another cause for concern is the fact that education is not connected to the life and social/cultural environment of marginalised groups like tribal people”.10 In certain cases, the experiences and history of these marginalised groups are presented as inferior in the content of education. Hence the content of education may be seen as non-inclusive by the students from these groups and this can lead to certain disinterest or even disempowerment. This problem could be aggravated by the fact that most of the teachers in universities come from the mainstream population or dominant section (and even if a section from these marginalised groups has received higher education, they may not qualify to be appointed as teachers in universities). Hence there is a demand for spaces of higher education which value the history, culture, livelihood and life experience of these marginalised groups. The demand for universities by indigenous people is an important reflection of this phenomenon. This was noted in different committees constituted by the Government of India including Report of the High Level Committee on Socio-Economic, Health and Educational Status of Tribal Communities of India (2014). 10 

1.2  Universities with Social Purpose: Different Examples

5

1.2 Universities with Social Purpose: Different Examples

generic types. In certain cases, there was a felt need for certain professionals, and that has led to the founding of these educational institutes. For There are universities which have aimed at the example, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) educational needs of the students from working was created to train social workers (who were class families. Ruskin College in the UK, for found to be needed to manage urban charities and example, was established in 1899 as a free uni- mediate between workers and management of versity for working-class people, providing eve- private factories), and the Institute of Rural ning and correspondence courses. The landless Management, Anand, was founded to develop workers’ movement in Brazil has been running management professionals for federations of higher education programs for the younger adults dairy cooperatives, and Azim Premji University from traditionally landless families, most belong- was for the creation of professionals in the ing to black or mixed-race populations (Mariano domain of education and development who were and Tarlau 2019). Higher education institutes/ demanded by different non-governmental organprograms which cater to indigenous people can isations working in India. There are cases where be seen in different parts of the world.11 These the purpose is somewhat non-instrumental. The function in Mexico, Colombia, New Zealand and idea that indigenous people should have access to Bolivia. There are universities for tribal popula- spaces of higher education where the culture, tions in India.12 There are institutes which aim at livelihood and practices of these people are repcreating appropriate professionals for social and resented is important beyond the employment human development. A set of Brazilian universi- opportunities provided by such an education. The ties has run a special training program for creat- creation of such universities in underdeveloped ing school teachers from and for indigenous regions could be (a) to enhance the access to populations (Gomes et al. 2020). The University higher education for the students living there; and of Brasilia, has a master’s program for those who (b) based on a somewhat vague (and not-so-­ want to work towards the development of indig- concrete) idea that such an institute of higher enous, black and landless people in the country. education may enable the development of these Azim Premji University in India is founded with regions.15 the main objective of creating reflective practitioSometimes alternative universities are set up ners in the domains of education and develop- for ideological reasons. For example, Kashi ment.13 There are specific institutes of higher Vidyapith (in Varanasi) and Gujarat Vidyapith (in education which aim at the creation of rural man- Ahmedabad) founded in the 1920s were inspired agers or social workers.14 by the vision of self-reliance and self-rule of The purposes of these universities or the Mahatma Gandhi. Mahatma Gandhi viewed these expectations from students who are educated in as places for those who boycott the universities of such universities can be categorised into a few the colonial government. There was a certain focus on Hindi, self-reliance (in production processes) and anti-colonialism in the content of higher edu11  https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ cation pursued in these Vidyapiths. The post-indeindigenization-of-higher-education-trends-in-india-latin-­ pendent governments accepted these alternative america-and-new-zealand/ 12  These include Indira Gandhi National Tribal University universities as national institutes as they came (http://www.igntu.ac.in) and Central Tribal University for under the University Grants Commission (UGC) Andhra Pradesh. and central/state governments in the 1960s. https://azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in These include Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai (https://www.tiss.edu) and Institute for Rural Management, Anand (https://www.irma.ac.in). 13  14 

As evident from the founding of the University of Central Asia. 15 

6

1  Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific…

There are two kinds of challenges for universities with specific social purposes. First is institutional and the second is educational (with respect to teaching, research and community engagement). Some of the institutional and socioeconomic challenges are discussed in the following section. (Different educational challenges are discussed in the following chapters).

1.3 Should There Be Universities for Social Purposes? What About Other Institutes? There could be a genuine concern about whether universities are the appropriate spaces for education with specific social purpose, and such a concern was there even in the beginning of twentieth century. This was a point of contention during the early days of functioning of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) which was founded to create informed social workers. The original form of TISS came to exist in 1936 as Sir Dorabji Tata Graduate School of Social Work.16 Its purpose was to create trained professionals for managing welfare/charity programs in urban and industrial/factory settings. There was an interesting debate in the beginning of social-work education in India on whether such an education should be part of a university or not. This is documented in the literature (Yelaja 1987). Yelaja describes how the early directors of TISS were cautious about adopting the traditions of universities, that might restrict the new institution’s freedom to develop. By the 1950s, two more schools of social work were started in India. Though one of these started as an independent institute, it became part of the Delhi University  – the Delhi School of Social Work. The other came up as an integral part of the University of Baroda.17 Those who were associ-

https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ from-an-institute-of-social-work-to-a-university-ofsocial-­sciences-the-evolution-of-tiss/ 17  There were two other institutes of social work by then. One was the one part of Kashi Vidyapith, and the other was Bombay Labour Institute. 16 

ated with these universities highlighted the importance of this affiliation to develop and test a body of knowledge and to socialise the new professionals into academic roles (Yelaja 1987). However, this argument considers social work like any other scholarly activity that is carried out in a university setting. How far this is true is an interesting question. It may be noted that even those who have recognised the need for university affiliation and status, cautioned “against the loss of freedom and initiative which were so vitally needed for the growth of professional education for social work in its early years.” Yelaja (1987, 367). However, TISS sought and received the status of a university, later. TISS has also moved away from the focus on social work and became a university for liberal education and social sciences (though it continues its conventional programs on social work). Whether to become a university or not was a dilemma not only for the institutes of social work but also for management schools. That was the reason why the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) have awarded ‘post-graduate diploma in management’ instead of an MBA degree. Professors of Harvard Business School and of the University of California, submitted reports for the setting up of these management institutes in India and recommended the creation of these outside the university system. When the first two of these were founded, they chose not to seek a degree-granting status because it would restrict the autonomy of their operation (Paul 2012). However, the situation has changed recently with the Government of India allowing the IIMs to offer post-graduate degrees. There is a possibility that such a change may encourage institutes to focus less on the usefulness of a course, in the context of social purpose, and more on whether or not it meets the requirement of a postgraduate program. There can be multiple compulsions to be (part of) a conventional university. The need to get funding from the government and other such sources may encourage the institutes of higher education to follow the common framework. There may be a need to give degrees as a reward

1.5  Idea Versus Implementation

for the completion of an education program (and then, perhaps gradually the degree may become more important than the education) and that would be another compulsion to be part of the university. There may be a need for a recognisable degree to ensure the acceptance of students in general labour markets.

1.4 Socioeconomic Challenges of the Universities with Specific Social Purposes These universities with specific social purposes came up through different routes. First through the demand of sections of society. Indigenous people of Latin America demand spaces of higher education wherein their culture, livelihood and aspirations are articulated.18 In fact, there is a long-standing struggle by an indigenous movement in Colombia to establish their own university.19 They agitated to get recognition and financial resources from the Government of Colombia (and these efforts were only partly successful). The demands from such marginalised social groups may get acceptance and resources from governments and this could be an important pathway for the establishment of such universities. For example, the intercultural universities in Mexico or Bolivia, or New Zealand’s Wānanga, can be seen as the responses of the state to meet the demands of indigenous people. In certain cases, the government or policy-­ makers may perceive that such special universities are required and may go ahead with their institution. The tribal university in India is of this type. Altruistic individuals or trusts may also found institutes of higher education or universities with a specific purpose. The Tatas (a major This is the underlying reason for the establishment of an intercultural university by a conventional university in Mexico. https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity. edu.in/intercultural-universities-in-latin-america -lessons-for-­india/ 19  This is discussed in the section of Colombian case here: https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ intercultural-universities-in-latin-america-lessons-for-­ india/ 18 

7

corporate company in India) was behind the establishment of Tata Institute of Social Sciences (which was initially meant to create social and community workers). Azim Premji  – a well-­ known philanthropist in India – also provided a substantial endowment for the establishment of a university with a specific purpose. The Institute of Rural Management, Anand (IRMA) is the outcome of actions by a visionary (Varghese Kurien) – the initiator of cooperative enterprises to help dairy farmers in India. These different routes for establishing universities with specific social purposes may shape their trajectories but there could be some generic challenges. Some of these are taken up in the following sections.

1.5 Idea Versus Implementation Sometimes the idea to create a university with a specific purpose may not be taken with a complete understanding of the connection between higher education and the purpose, or how this connection can be strengthened. When the idea of a university was initially mooted within the Azim Premji Foundation, whether the university was to be seen as an intervention in higher education or as a way to create trained people for improving school education was a point of debate. The foundation initially focused on improving access to and quality of school education. There may be different ideas (some of these could be realistic and others not so realistic20) especially among the founders of such universities. When the educational achievement of a large population is the social problem to be addressed by a university, there could be attempts to create a few good quality schoolteachers, without assessing how much

When the purpose of an organisation is to improve the access and quality of school education for the majority of people in a country, the starting of a conventional good quality university may not meet the purpose since it can provide higher education to only a small section of students many of whom already have access to (reasonable) quality education. In fact, such a university even if it provides education free to its students can aggravate educational inequality in the country. 20 

8

1  Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific…

these few teachers can improve the educational achievement of such a large population. There can be different ideas on the purpose itself. For example, if a university aims at the development of a region, there can be multiple and contesting ideas on development. At one extreme, some may see normal economic growth as development, and some others may see even development itself as the cause of all social problems.21 Narrowing down to a specific development goal may not be that easy. The founder’s idea of an appropriate education need not be shared by the targeted students or the social group from which they come from. Even when sections of scholars consider an education that reflects the livelihood, language and practices of indigenous people or such marginalised groups desirable, it is not unusual to see the students from such groups wanting greater access to normal education. They may want the university (that targets them) to provide conventional education programs. This trend is visible in other aspects too. When tribal languages were used for the education of students from tribal communities in parts of India, a section of parents belonging to this group wanted English-medium education (rather than the use of their language).22 They see the use of their own language as a route for their continued marginalisation. It is possible that the founders of universities with specific social purposes may have lofty ideas and a vision but there may not be an actual plan and/or its effective implementation to see that the intended social purpose is achieved. This is especially so when we think about the difficulty in planning and ensuring the effective implementation for using higher education for specific social purposes. A university may start creating many graduates in, say, economics and sociology and so on, without adequate reflection Sociologists, Anthropologists and economists may focus on and work with different goals of development. There can be divergent views even among economists too. For an interesting exposition of these differences, refer Williamson (2012). 22  This was noted in Maharashtra state of India. This is discussed in https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity. edu.in/the-need-for-intercultural-education-in-indialessons-­from-quest-maharashtra/ 21 

on what employment these graduates can gain to improve their own lives or the sustainable development of the region. It is also possible that funders may not have adequate incentive to see that the intended purpose is achieved given that this is a lot more tiresome than allocating money for the purpose and getting the joy of having done the right thing or the social recognition. Though the university is started by a person or group, the leadership or sources of funding may change over time. The new leadership may have different ideas and different government processes may intervene. For example, in an Indian context, there are many differences between rural management and other forms of management such as hospital management or hotel management. If new leadership or new forms of government funding or direction fail to appreciate these differences, it may lead to the transition of an institution with a specific social purpose, to a conventional management school. It may work against its continued pursuit of the original social purpose. There is an issue related to the possible employment opportunities of students who pass out of these universities. In certain cases, some of these universities/institutes are founded for a specific set of professionals who are in demand. For example, the Institute of Rural Management in Anand (IRMA) was created when the parent organisation (namely the National Dairy Development Board, NDDB) faced difficulty in getting enough appropriately qualified managers. Azim Premji University started with the idea that there would be a demand for reflective practitioners in the domain of education and development, and such an expectation is found to be true since more than 90% of students from its flagship programs (who seek placement) get jobs in such organisations. However, there were cases where the graduates of universities with specific social purposes met with inadequate employment opportunities. The employment market for graduates from intercultural universities in Latin America is not vibrant.23 A special undergraduate https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ indigenization-of-higher-education-trends-in-india-latin-­ america-and-new-zealand/ 23 

1.6  Inadequate Resources

9

program was created as part of the rural campus of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) but there were not enough employment opportunities for the students who pass out, and that has led to a demand for making its program somewhat conventional so that the students can pursue normal post-graduate programs.24 This is part of a larger issue. Higher education meets the instrumental purpose of enabling students to get employment. Although that is not the only or main objective of higher education, the pursuit of broader objectives cannot be separated from the instrumental purpose of employment. Students may be demotivated if the education does not enable them to get employment, and this can have spillover effects into the functioning of the university as a whole. Such a challenge can be there for universities with specific social purposes too.

paid by students. This can have an impact on the nature of students seeking admission in such universities. Those who can pay fees to meet the recurring costs of the university need not be those who are appropriate for the social purpose of the university. What we have described is not hypothetical but has happened in the case of such universities as described below. For example, the decline of the funding from the founding organisation has encouraged the Institute for Rural Management, Anand (IRMA), to increase the student fees. The students who pay a fee which is comparable to a conventional management institute may look for the job of a conventional manager. Such students cannot be expected to become the managers of cooperatives or enterprises owned by small producers.26 This is a clear case where the funding strategy of the university works against the social purpose. The shift in the sources of funding over time can also have a similar impact. The transition in terms of 1.6 Inadequate Resources funding from a source that designed the university to a general-purpose government-funding If the universities are not established by govern- mechanism may accelerate the transition of the ments with an assurance of direct funding as part university with a specific purpose to that of a genof their regular budgeting process, these may face eral purpose. To some extent such a development different kinds of resource restrictions. If time-­ has taken place in the case of TISS and IRMA in bound financial support is given due to the India. demands of a section of society, it may not be a Sometimes public funding agencies disburse sustainable source of resource. This is true also money to higher education institutes based on when such universities are started with philan- certain criteria. This could be based on a ranking thropic funding without creating long-lasting by considering certain indicators. These indicafinancial endowments.25 This may lead to a com- tors may be developed for conventional universipulsion to generate resources through other ties and may include peer-reviewed publications. means. Philanthropists may start universities However, these may not be that relevant or approwith capital investments but may expect these to priate for universities or education programs with recover recurring costs through students’ fees. specific social purposes. This may reduce the All these can lead to an increase in the fees to be funding of such universities/programs. My personal experience suggests that such a problem was encountered by the Master’s Program to cre24  https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ ate professionals who work among indigenous, from-an-institute-of-social-work-to-a-university-ofblack and landless people in the University of social-­sciences-the-evolution-of-tiss/ 25  Though Tata Group created the TISS, there was no long-­ Brasilia. lasting endowment to support its functioning. Over time, it has to seek resources from other sources and this has an impact on its focus. This issue is discussed in https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/from-aninstitute-of-social-work-to-a-university-of-social-­ sciences-the-evolution-of-tiss/

This is discussed in https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/transition-of-institute-of-ruralmanagement-and-what-it-­m eans-for-azim-premjiuniversity/ 26 

10

1  Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific…

Even when there is government funding for universities with specific purposes, there could be political-economy pressures and such a political economy may favour conventional universities. When an indigenous university was started by a conventional university in Mexico, the salaries of the faculty of the former were lesser which compelled some of them to move towards conventional universities.27 The support base for conventional universities could be higher among citizens, and hence governments may be compelled to allocate more resources for that purpose. The program to start special teacher education programs for indigenous people in Brazilian universities was taken as part of the political transition in the country through which indigenous and less-privileged groups could become influential over time in the government. However, such enabling conditions may change as part of periodical elections and this can have a negative impact on the resources available to such specific education programs. If such a university is started without an assured funding, it is obvious that it will limit the operations and activities of the university as in the case of the one started by the indigenous movement in Colombia.28 If the universities with social purposes mobilise resources from its own constituency (like the students who want such an education), the overall resources that are available may be limited. It may reduce its attractiveness as a university to different stakeholders including potential teachers. Such universities may be seen as ‘second-best’ spaces of higher education for the targeted groups like indigenous people. With their limited resources and facilities, these could become spaces of poor people’s education.

1.7 Lower Private Returns from Education for Social Purposes and the Consequent Challenges

This is discussed in https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/intercultural-universities-in-latinamerica-lessons-for-­india/ 28  For details, refer https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/indigenization-of-higher-educationtrends-in-india-latin-­america-and-new-zealand/

29 

27 

Universities with specific social purposes aim at creating graduates who can take up jobs or careers connected to these purposes. However, some of these jobs, like a social or community worker or a rural manager, may get a lesser compensation compared to those who have similar educational proficiencies and who pass out of conventional universities. This is due to the fact that profit-maximisation may not be the objective of organisations with social purposes. Managers of for-profit companies may get a higher monetary compensation due to the ease of measuring their contribution to the profit of the organisation, and the incentives of the ‘owners’ of such an organisation to compensate those who contribute to the profit. On the other hand, the contribution of organisations which work towards one or other social purpose could be intangible, long-term, and to the society as a whole. Hence in these organisations, unlike the case of private firms, there are no such direct owners who have the incentive to reward a well-performing employee. The lack of a ‘residual claimant’ makes the incentives of these organisations complex.29 Hence such jobs are more suitable for a self-selected group who would derive happiness from a combination of material compensation and non-material rewards (like the joy in helping others or doing the right thing or extrinsic recognition that such people may get from society).30 However, the possibility of lesser monetary compensation from these jobs may reduce the ‘market value’ of universities with social purposes. Those students who may not get admission in

For a detailed discussion of such problems, refer Stiglitz (2000). 30  The challenges in managing the employees of such organisations are discussed in https://practiceconnect. azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/challenges-in-managingemployees-of-an-altruistic-­organisation/

1.8  Who May Seek Admission in Universities with a Social Purpose?

conventional universities may opt for these social-purpose universities.31 The role of intrinsic motivation is higher in notfor-profit organisations (Drucker 1990). Hence the real challenge for the universities with social purposes is to identify those students who are likely to be motivated intrinsically to work in such organisations. This may require clearer signals to be made available in the public domain, as in the case of one such institute where certain corporate organisations are not allowed to recruit students through campus placements. This is known to students beforehand. This communicates certain signals to potential students and it may dissuade certain kinds of students. Thus, the culture of the institute which is recognised externally may enable certain self-selection of students. However, a perfect targeting of those students who are intrinsically motivated to be in non-profit organisations may be difficult to operationalise.

1.8 Who May Seek Admission in Universities with a Social Purpose? Ideally, those who see the social purpose important and who are willing to work towards it should seek admission in such universities. A section of students could be of this type. However, these universities may attract other kinds of students too. It is possible that a section of students may make mistakes in this regard. There could be incorrect expectations and miscalculations of the benefits of a career that contributes to the social purpose. This is common in all educational investments, and there can be different strategies including the provision of better information to address this problem. However, there could be other difficult challenges. First, in public expectations, each university may have a position in terms of reputation, and this may influence the decision of students Such a tendency was visible among the students of indigenous groups, that their choice between conventional and intercultural universities in Mexico and Colombia. refer https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ indigenization-of-higher-education-trends-in-india-latin-­ america-and-new-zealand/ 31 

11

when they seek admission and that of employers when they hire these students. These expectations need not be in tune with the social purpose. For example, The Institute of Rural Management (which started with a specific social purpose) is seen as one among the best twenty management institutes in India, this perception drives the demand for admission in this institute, and also the willingness of private companies to recruit its graduates, but all these are not so connected to the founding purpose of the institute – which was to create managers for organisations owned by small producers like dairy farmers.32 Secondly, students may match their aspirations or interest in different education programs based on their achievements in previous education. This is especially so when such education is recognised in the admission process and is useful in qualifying examinations. However, this process of matching students based on their previous education may not be adequate to create a set of graduates who are deeply interested in and capable of contributing towards a specific social purpose. If admission procedures are relaxed in terms of the achievements in previous education, that may encourage not-so-proficient students who are not so interested in the social purpose to seek admission in these universities. Fine-tuning admission procedures to see that these are adequate to enrol those who are sincerely interested in the social purpose could be a major challenge for these universities.33 It is not that there are no people who are contributing to the specific social purpose. There are community organisers or managers of organisations owned by small producers and so on. However, they may not get an appropriate educahttps://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ education-for-rural-management-challenges-and-possibilities/ 33  This is a challenge faced by Azim Premji University. Sections of students of the university may not want to take up jobs in development organisations which work in the remote parts of India. Those people who serve as employees in these organisations may not be able to get education in the university as their previous educational background may not be strong and hence may not pass the entrance/ qualifying examinations. This is discussed in https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/universitiesfor-a-just-equitable-humane-and-sustainable-­society/ 32 

12

1  Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific…

tion since there are not many institutes of higher education which target them, and these people may not be able to get admission in such institutes due to the general procedures of admission which focus on previous educational achievements or qualifying examinations which evaluate students on the basis of a narrower set of indicators. All these may create a mis-match between the students that these universities want to get, and those who seek admission there.

1.9 Who Becomes Teachers in Universities with a Social Purpose? There is a general pool of people with higher levels of education (mostly with doctoral education) who can become teachers in all kinds of universities and they come out of conventional universities. Universities with specific social purposes also may get their faculty from this common pool. For example, in a university which focuses on the social purpose of ‘quality school education for all’, the faculty may come from philosophy, psychology or sociology of education and other such disciplines. It is not unusual to see that those who are proficient in these disciplines have no experience of teaching in schools. The challenges of a school teacher (for example, to ensure that children from less privileged backgrounds get quality schooling) are somewhat unknown to these university teachers. There is no other pool of educated persons from which such a university can recruit teachers. If the recruitment is made only from practitioners (say school teachers), they may not have adequate academic background, and that can be a major challenge in teaching theory-informed reflective practice. When practitioners are recruited as part of universities with social purposes, they may be marginalised in the education program as organisers of community interactions.34 Such a problem was observed in the intercultural university in Veracruz, Mexico. Refer https://practiceconnect. azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/intercultural-universitiesin-latin-america-lessons-for-­india/

In those universities which are set up for the intercultural education of indigenous people, there is a need for education to reflect on the culture, livelihood and practices of these people. However, mainstream society does not have enough exposure to these features. More often, people who are ‘qualified’ to be university teachers come from the mainstream population. On the other hand, those ‘leaders’ or ‘knowledgeable persons’ from indigenous communities may not have appropriate education to become teachers in universities. This may create problems in universities which aim at intercultural education. They may not get appropriately qualified teachers and may have to depend on ‘insiders’ of the targeted group. There can be issues in engaging such people as teachers within the framework of universities. If a combination of teachers (some from the mainstream population and some from indigenous people) are employed for this purpose, there can be a dual faculty structure, and this can lead to unpleasant situations. Such a situation is not uncommon in the intercultural universities in Latin America. A similar problem can be seen in other institutes of higher education too, such as Gujarat Vidyapeeth.35 This is an institute founded to realise the vision of Mahatma Gandhi in the realm of higher education. It aims at providing an appropriate higher education to all – especially, the marginalised social groups. Even today, around 45% of the students are from the tribal communities of India. It also attempted to sustain an egalitarian and Gandhian culture within the campus. However, the Vidyapeeth requires resources, and hence it became part of the University Grants Commission (UGC)36 framework and through that process became eligible to receive finance from the government. Though this has solved the problem of resources to a certain extent, it creates other kinds of problems. Teachers were recruited initially from various backgrounds so as to provide an education which was considered appropriate by the founders. However, all of them may not meet the qualification requirements decided by the UGC

34 

https://www.gujaratvidyapith.org The agency which determines the funding for higher education in India. 35  36 

1.10  Homogenisation of the World Economy and the Consequent Homogenisation of Education

whose main job is to regulate conventional universities/colleges. This has created a certain discrepancy at the Vidyapeeth between teachers who are UGC-­recognized and those who are not. Mitigating this discrepancy is not easy.37 What if a university needs to appoint practitioners who may not have doctoral degrees but several years of practical experience as teachers? It would be difficult to determine their employment conditions within the UGC framework. It may be possible to appoint such people and provide them with appropriate salaries if the university has its own resources. Otherwise, the adoption of a uniform framework may determine not only who can teach but also, what can be taught. It can work against those experiments in higher education which attempt to do something different from that of a conventional university. Though there have been formal (governmental) attempts to recognise the importance of such different universities in certain parts of the world (say, Latin America), India is yet to do it. This is a general issue that will need to be confronted whenever some form of higher education is used for a specific social purpose. In such a place, the curriculum, pedagogy, and the nature of faculty and students should be in tune with the specific purpose. However, these may not then meet the requirements of a conventional university or may not be acceptable to the regulatory bodies which are meant to ensure certain criteria of basic quality in conventional universities.

(Lechner and Boli 2003). Though there are different views on the positive and negative impacts of the homogenisation of the economy as part of globalisation, most commentators may agree on the empirical reality of such a homogenisation. This may manifest in different forms. There could be a certain homogenisation of consumption. Consumption need not depend fully or mainly on local production, and the dependence on consumption of products from elsewhere can also lead to a globalisation of production. A consequence of this trend is a certain standardisation of production all over the world. When education is seen as the way to get employment and higher incomes, and the economy is homogenous, it is normal for the education to take a homogenous form.38 All these indicate that the contents of education are determined by the imperatives of the mainstream economy.39 Hence it may not accommodate the knowledge and cultural practices of cultural minorities, or it cannot give adequate importance or space to culture and similar aspects which may not have much ‘value’ for employment in the modern economy. A homogenising influence on local culture is possible and this could lead to diminished uniqueness of local ­culture, which in turn could result in loss of identity, and exclusion or even conflict.40 One response to this situation is a position that undervalues the importance of economic development.41 Another is one that underestimates the Scholars have noted the homogenisation of education as part of globalisation. For example, refer, Gidley (2008). 39  This trend is noted in the literature, especially in the context of higher education. Kromydas (2017: 1) ‘suggests that the current policy focus on labour market driven policies in higher education have led to an ever-growing competition transforming this social institution to an ordinary market-place, where attainment and degrees are seen as a currency that can be converted to a labour market value. Education has become an instrument for economic progress moving away from its original role to provide context for human development’. 40  http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/culture-­ and-­development/the-future-we-want-the-role-of-culture/ globalization-and-culture/ (accessed on 28 July 2021). 41  This is part of what can be called anti-­developmentalism. Refer, https://libcom.org/library/anti-developmentalism-­ what-it-what-it-wants-miguel-amorós (accessed on 28 July 2021). 38 

1.10 Homogenisation of the World Economy and the Consequent Homogenisation of Education One challenge of universities with specific social purposes is that the economy in almost all parts of the world has taken a certain homogenous form. This could be an outcome of globalisation Personal communication between Santhakumar and the Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor of the Gujarat Vidyapeeth. 37 

13

14

1  Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific…

importance of universalism.42 Neither of these is very useful. Even those minorities whose cultures are suppressed, want opportunities to participate in the modern economy and demand skills and proficiencies offered by modern education.43 For example, and as commented on above, sections of tribal population in India resist the use of their own indigenous language as the medium of their education and instead demand English-­ medium schooling.44 Hence if there is to be a higher demand for universities with specific purposes, it should be seen as something which can enhance the capabilities of all people to participate in the modern economy and acquire jobs, and much more – that is beyond the benefits that are offered by the economy or employment. Santhakumar

 Response and Suggestions A for the Structure of Our Book I have learned much from your commentary, although it will take me a while to fully digest it. I see it is significantly informed by your experiences in India and in other parts of the world, such as South America, linked to your interest in development, and hugely relevant to our book, and to the social purposes of universities everywhere. In some ways it paints a bleak picture; of a university sector closely linked to dominant peoples in nations around the world, institutions Cultural relativism is part of this trend. For a short description, refer https://courses.lumenlearning.com/culturalanthropology/chapter/cultural-relativism/ (Accessed on 28 July 2021); For a detailed reading, refer https:// plato.stanford.edu/entries/relativism/ (accessed on 28 July 2021). 43  This can be seen from the demand from these communities (such as tribal populations in India or indigenous people in Latin America) to have quota or reservation for admission in conventional universities. 44  This was observed in different parts of India but specifically in the state of Maharashtra. Refer, https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/the-need-forintercultural-education-in-india-lessons-­f rom-questmaharashtra/ (accessed on 28 July 2021). 42 

aligned with market forces, increasingly globalised, and struggling to address the needs, interests or well-being of groups marginalised by poverty, caste, class, ethnicity or geographical isolation. Much within your chapter resonates with me personally and professionally (particularly with my long-term interests in sustainability education), even though the social problems in my part of the world appear (to me) less severe in comparison. I also see attempts by governments and universities in other parts of the world, perhaps to address the issues as you describe, but perhaps, from my perspective, rather to develop missions, policies and strategies that might address the issues if they were, or could be, implemented, but probably will not, due to lack of resources, lack of understanding, lack of research, lack of planning, limited longevity, inherent conflicts between different objectives, or lack of commitment to succeed. Higher education remains an essentially middle-class enterprise in many parts of the world. I am not at all sure that the universities that I know have the social purposes that you espouse, at their heart. And your chapter introduces some stark alternatives. Are we to expect middle class academics, confident in their privileged status, to fully understand the working-­ class and rural students who enter this strange world? Are we to deny the ambitions of these special groups of students, to achieve the advantages to them and to their own children afforded by their middle-class educational experience? And what of students from different cultures who are not necessarily in deficit but still struggle to succeed in conventional higher education, perhaps because they have particular aspirations? Perhaps we aim to educate a special cohort of university teachers, whose primary task is to provide a special education for each group of students, set on ensuring that they aspire to further the interests of that particular group, be they working class, lower caste, rural in origin, of particular ethnicity? Your argument for universities with a special purpose is important, but I am troubled as I see this as a strategy that might enable ‘conventional universities’ to maintain their hegemonic intentions. Our world of specific

A Response and Suggestions for the Structure of Our Book

social purposes is complex, and this complexity may be an important factor in maintaining what we have now. In addition, I am troubled to imagine how institutions with specific social purposes could possibly address the scale of change imagined by our internationally agreed SDGs. In fewer than 8 years from the time of writing, the nations that you and I have most experience of, India, Aotearoa New Zealand and the United Kingdom, have targeted providing 9  years of compulsory free, publicly-funded, inclusive, equitable, quality primary and secondary education and a further three years that should be free but optional. Achieving the 9 years should be straightforward in some settings, until we add in the ‘all’ and the other adjectives, and emphasise ‘compulsory’. A key question remains about the 3 additional years that all have agreed to target, that likely will distinguish between those who could potentially go on to university (and so become doctors, teachers, scientists, engineers and lawyers), and those who are less likely to. And unless our book has a dramatic effect on universities worldwide, they will most likely proceed to universities very much like those that you identify as ‘conventional’. And, most likely, in situations where poor, working class, socio-economically deprived students and culturally diverse students may be represented, but not necessarily in proportion to the social structure of their nations. It may be that some countries will aspire to ensure that such divisions will not predict who goes to university and who does not, but the SDGs do not clarify this, and our own conversations so far certainly cast doubt on the prospects for this in some settings. I shall extend this argument later, in particular by insisting that we explore the relationship that may or may not exist between the social purposes of universities, and what for many is the principal aim of a ‘higher’ education, the development of critical thinking and intellectual independence. Resonance for me also comes from my long-­ term interest in environmental education, and more recently, education for sustainable development. It may be that in these respects, my interests and hopes have more alignment with yours,

15

and I can be more hopeful about universities’ contributions to social justice. I know that your commentary focuses on social purposes, but an aspiration for social justice combines with that for environmental justice to create our internationally accepted sustainable development goals. I do understand that many nations wish to address dramatic disparities in poverty, and national standards of health and wealth, before they tackle their own environmental problems, but we do have a great deal of research and development underway in universities in some parts of the world that is asking very similar questions about the roles and responsibilities of universities in educating the next generation not to make the same mistakes as previous generations have. Much of this research relates to sustainability as a whole, rather than only to social justice, but is nonetheless relevant to our inquiry. In later chapters, we need to address the teaching, research and community engagement functions of our universities with respect to our social purposes, but also in the context of broader sustainability missions, to gain a clear picture of what is happening. And this process needs to include the wealth of academic work underway in our conventional universities, and hopefully in institutions with specific social purpose, whether this is applied directly to the issues that you describe or more academically, aimed at understanding the complexity of our social woes and of potential solutions to them. I always liked Stanley Fish’s interpretation of the academic role; “To academicize a topic is to detach it from the context of its real world urgency, where there is a vote to be taken or an agenda to be embraced, and insert it into a context of academic urgency, where there is an account to be offered or an analysis to be performed” (Fish 2008, 27). Your commentary does a fine job of illustrating the real-world urgency of the social purposes of universities. We also need to explore the situation in the context of academic urgency. We need both. And now for some book-related house-­ keeping matters. It will be difficult for our readers to share our conceptual journey and analysis without knowledge of the educational systems of the countries

16

1  Prologue: Social Purpose, Challenges to Achievement, the Possibility of Universities with Specific…

that have created our experiences and influenced our powers of imagination and analysis. We need a highly descriptive chapter about the structure of education and perhaps some case studies of social purpose in action. We provide this in Chap. 2. Our experiences are primarily in India, New Zealand and the UK, and our book focuses on these nations, but also identifies relevant research and development from many other nations. At some point we shall need to be more specific about the social purposes that you introduce in this prologue, and about the specific social purposes that you assign to some institutions. You and I have been communicating now for three years on the matter, and although we may have developed a shared understanding on what these might be, we likely do not agree on what they are. We have been happy to allow this conundrum to infuse our conversations, without derailing them. But we shall need to provide readers of our book with some certainty, and before them, editors and reviewers will be obstructive without some clarity. Chapter 2 will make a start, but is unlikely to finish this task. Accordingly, definitions of ‘social purpose’, ‘sustainability’, ‘sustainable development’ and ‘conventional university’ do need to be developed in the book, as seeking to define them clearly at an early stage will likely derail what later chapters aim for. We do need to emphasise the conversational aspects of our enquiry. This is clearly not a conventional academic book and must not be entirely written in third person passive voice. You and I are far from passive in these contexts and need to have opportunities to state opinions and to describe personal experiences in first person singular mode. And sometimes we agree and need to switch to first person plural. Nevertheless, we note that some elements of this book do need to describe situations in academic terms, and more conventional third person literary styles will need to be adopted in some sections. We have every reason to expect that readers will understand these different styles and what they say about the contexts of each section of text. We must also be mindful of our likely readers. Some will, we hope, be university people with academic interests in the social purposes of their work, but oth-

ers may be looking in from the outside, and likely confused about how higher education operates and why it operates in ways that are different from how individual institutions say they would like to operate. Matching this diversity of interest will not be straightforward, even in the ways that we evidence our observations. Some of our references, necessary in an evidential sense, will be behind paywalls and inaccessible to some (an irony that will not escape the attention of many of our readers, given the topic of the book). Hopefully we have added enough web-based resources, accessible to many more, to widen the book’s accessibility. And as you suggest yourself, yours is a commentary, or narrative. Perhaps because I feel that I know you now, I do not doubt the earnestness of your assertions, or the power of your narrative account, but in my own mind I do need to integrate it with my own experience, and what I know of the higher education literature that relates to it. It is your interpretation, based on your insights and your experience. Higher education surely needs to draw from personal experience, and benefit from the insights of those who practise within it, but also move forward in a scholarly manner. Scholarship always builds on what has come before and contributes to what comes after. Doubts, leading to questioning, reinterpretation and yet more doubts are an integral part of the institution of higher education that I respect. Our book will need to explore and explain how knowledge claims, by you and I, by institutions of higher education, by those who practise within it, by governments who attempt to direct it, and by those who wield power with money, are developed and interpreted and promulgated. Our book is to be an analysis, set on academicizing complex issues, and perhaps exposing false claims, unworthy premises and naive promises. Throughout we need to explain to our readers the grounds on which we make knowledge claims ourselves, and limitations inherent to them. So, the key elements of our book are agreed. Beyond this prologue readers will learn more about the educational systems that inform our analyses, the nature of knowledge that we experience and espouse, analyses of how conventional

References

universities and those with specific social purposes create and experience participation, learning and teaching, community engagement and research, how institutions are governed and how this governance impacts and limits the extent to which institutions know and understand themselves, and how higher education’s quest for intellectual independence interacts with its social purposes. Readers will understand that this book is an analysis of a complex construct, but also a conversation between two individuals deeply immersed within it who do not necessarily agree. Kerry Shephard

Reference Fish S (2008) Save the world on your own time. Oxford University Press.

References Borjesson, M.  And Brady, D. (2016) Elite strategies in a unified system of higher education. The case of Sweden; Dans L’Année sociologique, 66, 1, 115–146 Brennan J (2004) The social role of the contemporary university: contradictions, boundaries and change ten years on: changing education in a changing world, Center for Higher Education Research and Information (CHERI). The Open University Press, Buckingham Brezis E (2016) Elitism in higher education and inequality: why are the nordic countries so special. Retrieved from https://www.intereconomics.eu/contents/year/2018/ number/4/article/elitism-­i n-­h igher-­e ducation-­a nd-­ inequality-­why-­are-­the-­nordic-­countries-­so-­special. html Drucker FP (1990) Managing the non-profit organisation: practice and principles. Harper Collins, New York Gelbgiser D (2018) College for all, degrees for few: for-profit colleges and socioeconomic differences in degree attainment. Social Forces 96(4):1785–1824. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy022

17 Gidley J (2008) Beyond homogenisation of global education: do alternative pedagogies such as Steiner Education have anything to offer an emergent global/ ising world? https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087905132_ 016 Gomes AMR, de Miranda SA, de Tavares ML (2020) Between territories and knowledge practices. Challenges with indigenous teacher training in Brazil. Soz Passagen 12:271–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12592-­020-­00364-­z Gooptu N, Parry J (eds) (2014) Persistence of poverty in India. Social Science Press, New Delhi Karelis C (2008) The persistence of poverty: why the economics of the well-off can’t help the poor. Yale University Press, New Haven Kromydas T (2017) Rethinking higher education and its relationship with social inequalities: past knowledge, present state and future potential. Palgrave Commun 3:1. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-­017-­0001-­8 Lechner FJ, Boli J (eds) (2003) The globalization reader. Blackwell Publishing, Malden Mariano A, Tarlau R (2019) The landless workers movement’s itinerant schools: occupying and transforming public education in Brazil. Br J Sociol Educ 40(4):538–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.20 19.1565989 Mayer SE (2010) The relationship between income inequality and inequality in schooling. Theory Res Educ 8(1):5–20 Paul S (2012) A life and its lessons: memoirs. Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore Santhakumar V, Gupta N, Sripada R (2016) Schooling for all in India: Can we neglect the demand? Oxford University Press, New Delhi Stiglitz J (2000) Economics of public sector. W.  W. Norton Company, New York Trow M (2005) Reflections on the transition from Elite to Mass to universal access: forms and phases of higher education in modern societies since WWII. In: Altbach P (ed) International handbook of higher education. Kluwer Williamson J (2012) Some basic disagreements on development. Paper presented to the Development Policy Forum on “Rethinking Development Policy Packages” organized by KDI and the World Bank in Seoul. https://www.piie.com/commentary/speeches-­papers/ some-­basic-­disagreements-­development (opened on 4 February 2022) Yelaja SA (1987) Schools of social work in India: historical developments 1936–1966. Doctoral thesis submitted to the University of Pennsylvania

2

Universities and Their Social Purpose

2.1 Purposes of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Education and What Distinguishes University Education Before we embark on an exploration of social purpose in universities, particularly in an international context, we need to be clear about what universities are, how they fit within nations’ education systems and what we expect of them.

2.1.1 Educational Sectors Although there is some consistency internationally about the idea of a university, where universities fit into broader educational systems and how these educational systems are subdivided can be notoriously variable, making discussion and analysis about how students get to university, and what level of preparation for university study they have, fraught with issues of comparability. In many nations the division between compulsory education and non-compulsory education is perhaps clearest. Universities generally fit the noncompulsory category. Some countries, including New Zealand, mandate education for 11  years, most commonly between the ages of 5 and 16. But many do not and even in countries with some compulsion in this regard, there is great variation. India, for example, introduced compulsory educa-

tion between the ages of 6 and 14 in 2010. England recently extended its compulsory education to 18, for those born after September 1997. Whether or not education is compulsory, how much it costs, and for whom, is perhaps just as important. It is free for all children in some nations, and not so in many others. Costs, of course, come in diverse forms, beyond simple tuition fees, and what might be low or marginal costs in one country may be prohibitive in another. Whom, exactly, is entitled to free state-­ provided education is an important factor. For example, New Zealand’s Education Act mandated free and secular primary education for all children of European descent in 1877, but this did not apply to Māori children until 1894, although Māori children could attend the free schools if their parents wanted them to.1 Even though school education may be legislated to be compulsory and free, there are still in 2022 many children in many countries who do not regularly go to school. One study in 2016  in 151 countries found that Muslim women are less educated than women in most other religious groups, lag further behind their male co-religionists, but that such gender gaps are rapidly narrowing in some regions (McClendon et  al. 2016). The costs of attending university vary greatly from country to country and will be discussed in detail elsewhere. In most countries, attending university is not free. https://nzhistory.govt.nz/page/education-act-passed-law

1 

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_2

19

20

Challenges in dividing educational provisions into primary, secondary, tertiary and higher follow on from this analysis. In some countries, tertiary education is, in essence, post-compulsory, but not in all. In some, secondary and tertiary designations do not exist at all. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has produced an international standard [International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED)2] that characterises the nature of education in each of many sectors. The description for primary education is “Programmes typically designed to provide students with fundamental skills in reading, writing and mathematics and to establish a solid foundation for learning.” but no description is provided for tertiary education. Categories do not prescribe age ranges. And different countries and regions at present have their own qualification frameworks with their own categorisations and expectations. How universities fit into these diverse educational systems is clearly, at present, variable. In most countries, higher education is synonymous with university education, but in some, such as New Zealand, the term higher education is rarely used. ‘Further Education’ adds additional complexity in England. Looking to the future, free compulsory education for all is one of the SDG targets. Target 4.1 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes. The provision of 12  years of free, publicly-funded, inclusive, equitable, quality primary and secondary education  – of which at least nine years are compulsory, leading to relevant learning outcomes – should be ensured for all, without discrimination.3 It is notable that the achievement of this SDG target would get all children to a particular educational standard, presumably described by the “relevant learning outcomes” alluded to. But the http://uis.unesco.org/en/topic/international-standardclassification-education-isced 3  https://sdg4education2030.org/the-goal 2 

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose

expectation that some children would progress though a further three years of free, non-­ compulsory educational provision might be important to an imagining of the nature of higher education on a world-wide United Nations scale, as it is this group who would be best prepared for university education. In a quest to understand more about higher education, and its place within education systems, we should explore in detail how these things currently exist in the three countries that we, the authors, know most about.

2.1.2 Diversity of Higher Education in the UK, New Zealand and India in the Twenty-First Century 2.1.2.1 The UK with a Focus on England The education sector in the UK is divided between early years, primary, secondary, further and higher. There are substantial education-­ system differences between different parts of the UK but in general early years relates to provision up to the age of five, primary is 5–11 and secondary is 11 until, nowadays, 18. Education in England between 5 and 18 is free and compulsory (extended recently from 16). Some government funding is generally available for some early years’ education. Some children are not educated within state-sector schooling at all, but attend private, fee paying, schools. Education between five and 18 is organised around national curricula, common to England and Wales but different in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Higher Education generally requires successful completion of prior education sectors, starts at 18, is selective (based on academic qualifications and other factors), has tuition fees and is supported by a comprehensive student-loan system with extensive subsidies depending on the socioeconomic status of applicants, and with approaches to increase participation for groups considered to be historically under-represented in higher education. The number of universities in the UK has changed in recent years (polytechnics were upgraded to universities in 1992) but at the time of writing there are 164, of which 90 are in England. There are also a small number of higher

2.1  Purposes of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Education and What Distinguishes University Education

education institutions, teaching to degree level, that do not have university status. And some universities are private, rather than public institutions. Further Education is complex. It generally relates to post-compulsory education that is not higher education. As such it generally involves education after the age of 16 but certainly integrates with both school-based education and university-­based education. Some but not all further education is vocational in nature. England does fund some adult and continuing education. Higher Education in England has an independent regulator, Office for Students. Much in this sector is highly competitive, increasingly so, and by design. The Office for Students has powers designed to support competition in the sector, in particular to allow new institutions with degree awarding powers to enter and succeed in the higher education ‘market’. The abilities of individual academics and of institutions to teach, to research and to have ‘impact’ is highly dependent on their competitiveness in this ‘market’. In 2018, nearly 40% of people in the UK aged 25–34 had a bachelor’s degree or equivalent.4 Higher Education in the UK has been greatly affected in recent years by concerns relating to who pays, who benefits, quality of teaching, inequality, social justice, and the UK’s relationship with Europe.

2.1.2.2 The Structure of Education in India Like the western world, formal institutes of learning, which we might call universities today, started as places for religious indoctrination in India too. Nalanda and Takshashila – two ancient universities which existed in the Indian continent at different periods in the last two millennia (based on archaeological evidence that came up during the colonial period) were focussing on Buddhist learning, though non-religious subjects like military science, medicine were also taught there. There were other such institutes of learning even before the arrival of colonial rulers in the continent. However secular universities came to https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance/ EAG2019_CN_NZL.pdf 4 

21

exist in the country during the colonial period. It is known that the purpose of education as imagined by the colonial rulers in India was to create ‘manpower’ to be part of the middle or lower levels of their administrative system. Providing ‘schooling to all’ was not the intention. Nowadays, and for some children, formal education in India starts with Early Childhood Education (ECE) at the age of three. The most prominent form of ECE is that provided by the government under Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS). The focus of ICDS is not only education, but rather the health of infants and pregnant mothers. However, the centres, which are created for this purpose in each village, known as ‘Anganwadi’, also provide ECE to children between 3 and 5 years old. The 12 years of school education in India are organised in different stages. The first stage is Primary Education (Grades I–V) for 6- to 10-year-old learners. It is followed by Upper Primary Education (Grades VI–VIII) for 11- to 13-year-old learners. The primary and upper primary together constitute Elementary Education. Secondary education (Grades IX–X) is for 14- to 15-year-old learners, and Senior Secondary Education (Grades XI–XII) for learners between 16 and 17  years old is the final stage in school education. Those who complete 12  years of schooling (and are mostly 18  years of age) can enter one or other form of higher education. There is a proposal to change the structure of school education in the New Education Policy 2020 but the new structure may take years to come to exist fully. There are possibilities for diversification into technical education (as part of school education) after the completion of 10 years in school. There are certificate courses offered in Industrial Training Institutes (ITI), or technical diploma programmes available in polytechnics. Senior secondary education in certain cases provides an opportunity for specialisation in certain vocations. Such vocational secondary schools offer courses in business communication, veterinary studies, agriculture and so on. Higher education has multiple streams. The general or liberal education in sciences, social

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose

22

sciences and humanities is organised in three years of undergraduate education (offering BA or BSc degrees), and two years of post-graduate education (MA or MSc Degrees), This may be followed by doctoral education (PhD). There are multiple forms of professional or technical-­ education options after 12 years of school education. The number of years required to complete graduate education in these professional courses (or to get professional degrees) is variable. For example, an engineering degree takes four years whereas five years may be needed for a degree in medicine or law. Colonial rulers created a few colleges and universities which provided liberal arts and science education and a number of professional colleges in engineering and medicine. Though there were some indigenous efforts to create colleges during the colonial period, most of this happened after India’s independence. There are multiple levels of higher education in India currently. There is a relatively small set of universities established by the government of India. These are similar to such universities elsewhere, where faculty (staff) research and conduct teaching programs on campuses, and degrees are awarded. Though there are a few universities of this kind also established by different state governments, most state universities are created to affiliate colleges. Each college (probably originally following the model in some UK universities) conducts teaching programs but their terminal examinations are conducted by the university to which the college is affiliated. These colleges can be owned by the state government, or aided by it but owned and managed by a private trust/person. Some colleges do not get any financial support from the government but are totally owned by a private trust/person. Since the cost of running most of these colleges come from student fees, these are called self-financing colleges. The main responsibility of affiliating universities is to conduct terminal examinations and award degrees. A similar structure can be seen in some professional education also. There are about 1000 universities, and 42,000 colleges (which are recognised by or affiliated to

a university) in India.5 All of these colleges and universities have traditional social purposes such as preparing graduates to become professional people, and citizens. We are also interested in universities that have been developed for specified social purposes. Although such institutions exist in many countries, for diverse purposes, India has several that are notable. The Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapith (in Varanasi) and the Gujarat Vidyapith (in Ahmedabad) were founded in the 1920s inspired by Gandhi’s vision of self-reliance and self-rule. They came under the University Grants Commission (UGC) and central/state governments in the 1960s. India has a specific need for social workers, particularly in rural areas, and universities have developed for this specific purpose. Similarly, managers of rural enterprises require particular skills and dispositions, and have been educated in particular university-level institutions in some regions. In addition, Azim Premji University is a not-for profit private university established in 2010 with “the vision to contribute to the realisation of a just, equitable, humane and sustainable society.6” and its main objective of creating reflective practitioners in the domains of education and human development. Some of the salient features of enrolment in Indian education based on the latest available government statistics are detailed here. The gross enrolment ratio in primary education is nearly 100% (2014/15). However, that figure comes down to 91.2% in upper primary, 78.9% in secondary, 54.2  in senior secondary and 24.3  in higher education. There can be certain variations among social groups too. For example, the enrolment of students belonging to Scheduled Tribes in senior secondary schools is nearly 15% points lower than that of others. However, there is an annual drop-out of a little more than 4% of students at primary level and this goes up to around https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/ files/statistics-new/AISHE%20Final%20Report%20 2018-­19.pdf 6  https://azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/our-story (np). 5 

2.1  Purposes of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Education and What Distinguishes University Education

17% at the secondary level. More than a quarter of students belonging to scheduled tribes drop out in secondary education. Nearly 25% of students who reach Grade 10 leave without a diploma. A similar percentage leaves without a diploma after senior secondary education. There are interesting statistics on enrolment in Indian education. Nearly 50% of students, which include those who do not enrol or who drop out at secondary level and those who leave without a diploma in Grade 10, do not complete secondary schooling successfully. Another 13.5% leave without a high school diploma after 12 years of schooling. On the other hand, 63% of those who complete school education successfully go for one or other kind of higher education. Indian education is, therefore, characterised by these two trends: a high proportion of Indian children do not complete schooling but the majority of those who do complete schooling pursue higher education. Although informal education exists everywhere in the world, perhaps in India its importance is greater than in highly-developed nations. Informal education is diverse, but this brief account needs to mention one form in particular, broadly identified as the People’s Science Movement (PSM) of which the Kerala Satra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) is one notable example, established in the Indian state of Kerala. KSSP “is a people’s organization with a decentralized democratic structure and democratic mode of functioning. It operates in the area of education, environment, ecology, health, resource management, consumer consciousness, women’s issues, national integration, etc. All the activities of KSSP are social and meant for changing the values and lifestyles of the people through mass mobilization. It is trying to liberate knowledge and take it to the common people at the grassroots level.” (Kumar 2021, 100156). The PSM is variously described as social activism or as a new social movement, and academic analyses of PSMs emphasise that that they are needed because state- and nation-run enterprises, such as universities and research institutions, are (in general) run for and by the elite in society and have

23

developed in ways that appear to be devoid of clear social commitment and purpose (Kumar 2021). The purposes, ways of working and successes of PSMs appear to overlap, compete, or perhaps put to shame, the social purposes of universities espoused by institutions, states and nation.

2.1.2.3 Aotearoa New Zealand There is no doubt that the current Aotearoa New Zealand education system largely reflects its British colonial past, but in addition, many developments in recent years relate to greater recognition of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi obligations. This treaty was signed in 1840 and allowed for British settlement whilst promising Māori authority over their lands and equal citizenship rights alongside British settlers. There are, nowadays, well-established educational sectors of early childhood (birth to 5 years), primary (5–12  years), secondary (13–18  years) and tertiary education (universities and diverse forms of mostly vocational institutes). Primary and secondary schooling is free for all children and currently three- and four-year-olds are entitled to 20  h per week of government funded early-­ childhood education. In recent years Māori language immersion schools from early childhood to tertiary education have developed, although these remain a small minority of schools and 97% of Māori children attend English-medium schooling (Education Review Office 2020). Increasing recognition of Te Tiriti obligations is leading to increasing inclusion of the Māori language and culture in all forms of education, and a greater recognition of these in wider society. Schools in Aotearoa New Zealand are expected to guide their work using The New Zealand Curriculum (NZC) in English-medium schools or Te Marautanga o Aotearoa in Māori-medium schools. For its size, Aotearoa New Zealand has a highly-complex tertiary-education sector. Tertiary education in New Zealand is almost synonymous with post-compulsory education, although schoolchildren who remain at school beyond the compulsory education cut-off age of

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose

24

16 are not included within the category of tertiary education, unless enrolled within a named secondary-­ tertiary programme. New Zealand currently enrols approximately 400,000 students in tertiary education from a country of approximately 4.5 million people and a relatively high % of young people achieve a bachelor’s degree-­ equivalent qualification (approximately 40% 25–34  year-olds in 20187). Tertiary education providers include universities, institutes of technology and polytechnics (recently combined into one single national institution: Te Pūkenga – New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology), private training establishments, industry training organisations and Wānanga (providing tertiary education over a range of qualifications based on Maori principles and values) in addition to a limited number of community education providers and secondary schools involved in tertiary education. Tertiary education is overseen substantially by the Tertiary Education Commission. The specific nature of each category of tertiary education is, to a degree, established by New Zealand’s Training and Education Act (2020), section 162 (4).8 Many tertiary education providers are empowered to teach and to award at undergraduate and postgraduate levels, although notably the quality assurance processes that apply to universities are different from those for the other parts of the tertiary sector (and managed by the sector itself). There are almost 1000 separate tertiary providers in New Zealand, eight of which are universities. Although each of New Zealand’s eight universities has significant independence, a range of government measures directs many of their actions, for example, processes directed at improving Māori and Pacific Islands student enrolment, retention and success. Limits to funding and competition between universities, and within universities, has significant impact on the agency of individuals and of institutions to function. Supporting community learning is a legislated obligation for universities in Aotearoa New https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance/ EAG2019_CN_NZL.pdf 8  https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2020/0038/ latest/LMS202213.html 7 

Zealand, but is not necessarily funded for. Most tertiary education providers charge tuition fees, although much of the real cost is funded by the government, which also provides a student loan system. Funding matters are highly political in Aotearoa New Zealand. Entry to university after school depends on achievement of University Entrance qualifications, but institutions do offer bridging qualifications and, after the age of 20, entry to many university programmes is hardly restricted at all.

2.2 The Idea of a University What we think of as a university nowadays almost certainly depends on who we are and what allegiances we have. The term ‘university’, from the Latin universitas magistrorum et scholarium, was applied as early as 1180 to the University of Bologna. It, and others soon to follow (such as Oxford, Cambridge and Salamanca), derived from monastic or catholic cathedral schools and became universities when studies diversified, in particular with the addition of Law. Bologna traces its origins in this way to 1088, but the Scuola Medica Salernitana traces its origins, as a medical school, to the ninth century. It seems indisputable that early universities in Europe were essentially professional schools of medicine, theology or law and responsible for indoctrinating scholars to these particular disciplines and studying these particular fields of enquiry. Meanwhile, or perhaps more correctly previously, equivalent things had been happening in Greece, Rome, Persia, Byzantium, China, India and the Islamic world, and perhaps even elsewhere, mostly without the benefit of a Latin descriptor. India, for example, claims the first university in the world, dating to the fifth Century; Nalanda University, originally established as a Buddhist monastery.9 In a European context, universities changed a lot in the 1800s. Humboldt is generally attributed with attempts to unify teaching with research in a new concept of the ‘research university’, initially in Germany but rapidly spreadhttps://eduvoice.in/top-10-oldest-universities-in-india/

9 

2.2  The Idea of a University

ing throughout Europe and to the USA. Many of the world’s ­currently most renowned universities stemmed from this era. Universities have not stopped changing, of course. An important development in the context of this book occurred in the late 1800s in the USA, with the creation of Land Grant Universities. At that time, politicians were worried that universities may be getting too concerned with their own disciplines, and insufficiently concerned about the needs of their local communities in matters that concerned their agriculture and developing industries. Land Grant institutions developed with practical research, teaching and community support, or University Extension, purposes. The University of Otago, New Zealand’s first university, opened in 1871 with a similar philosophy. Its School of Mines opened in 1878. The idea of a university clearly has a complex history and universities in the twenty-­ first Century are highly diverse. Historically, several attempts have been made to bring together universities from around the world, to discuss and perhaps agree their distinctive and common purposes. UNESCO has in particular held international conferences on the issue. In 1995 UNESCO produced a policy paper with the hope that “ … it may serve as an ‘intellectual compass’ for the Member States and for those in charge of higher education in designing their own policies” (UNESCO 1995, 3). The policy paper summarised UNESCO’s hopes in section 148. The goal of the action in which all stakeholders need to participate is to turn every institution of higher education into: –– a place for high-quality training, enabling students to act efficiently and effectively in a broad range of civic and professional functions and activities, including the most diverse, up-to-date and specialized; –– a place to which access is possible primarily on the basis of intellectual merit and of the ability to participate actively in its programmes, with due attention to ensuring social equity; –– a community fully engaged in the search, creation and dissemination of knowledge,

25

––

––

––

––

––

––

––

in the advancement of science, and participating in the development of technological innovations and inventions; a place of learning founded on quality and knowledge alone, which inculcates, particularly in the minds of its future graduates, commitment to the pursuit of knowledge and a sense of responsibility to place training at the service of social development; a place that welcomes return for updating and enhancement of knowledge and qualifications as part of institutional practice and culture; a community in which co-operation with industry and the service sectors for the economic progress of the region and nation is encouraged and actively supported; a place in which important local, regional, national and international issues and solutions are identified, debated and addressed in a spirit of learned criticism, and where the active participation of citizens in the debates on social, cultural and intellectual progress is encouraged; a place to which governments and other public institutions can go for scientific and reliable information which is increasingly being required for decision-making at all levels, and which also promotes public participation in the decision-making process; a community whose members, being fully committed to the principles of academic freedom, are engaged in the pursuit of truth, defence and promotion of human rights, democracy, social justice and tolerance in their own communities and throughout the world, and participate in instruction for genuine participatory citizenship and in building a culture of peace; an institution well situated in the world context, with all its accompanying threats and possibilities, and adapted to the rhythm of contemporary life, the distinctive features of each region, and of each country.

That universities should have social purpose is inherent to this policy statement. Almost every point includes a reference to the intention that universities should not be insular or inward look-

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose

26

ing, as in ‘ivory towers’, but should have ­beneficial impact on wider society. Some point to impacts through teaching, some through research, some through community engagement and some through equitable participation. Some suggest correcting societal imbalances based on gender, socioeconomic status, ethnicity or age. Some point to wholescale changes perhaps even at the level of societal values. Overall, there is the sense of an institution at the heart of the society that sponsors it, in service to it but also guiding it and always in a global context. Many of the themes described here are developed in more detail later in this book. These insights have been further developed and focussed in recent years, with notions of social purpose and impact harmonised in particular with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in some settings. The Times Higher Education Impact Rankings,10 for example, run alongside more conventional university rankings to address university impact with respect to the SDGs. Not all universities willingly enter ranking competitions and some concerns have been expressed about how social impact is quantified (see for example, Shephard et  al. 2021, for an analysis in the context of academic publications), but there appears no doubt about the scope of such rankings to motivate universities to reflect on their actions and wider impacts. On the other hand, not all conceptualisations of universities as educational entities highlight social purpose. The International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED), also referenced earlier in this chapter, defines Bachelor’s degrees rather blandly as; Programmes at ISCED level 6, or Bachelor’s or equivalent level, are often designed to provide participants with intermediate academic and/or professional knowledge, skills and competencies, leading to a first degree or equivalent qualification. Programmes at this level are typically theoretically-­ based but may include practical components and are informed by state of the art research and/or best professional practice. They are traditionally offered by universities and equivalent tertiary educational institutions. (ISCED 2011, 224) https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/ impact/2020/ 10 

2.2.1 The Idea of an Undergraduate Degree, Intellectual Independence and Social Purpose Although universities are known for a diversity of learning and teaching opportunities, it is the undergraduate degree, or bachelor’s degree, that they are best known for. Most analyses of the purposes of universities in the context of education focus on this experience and qualification. Primarily in this context, Newman (1907) characterised the university as an institution for independent intellectual self-empowerment, and much philosophical analysis has addressed Newman’s thoughts about universities that were originally delivered as a series of lectures in 1852. The quest for intellectual independence has been an important theme running through higher education discourses for more than a century (Oliver and Nichols 2001). In New Zealand, education legislation since 1989 has stipulated that the principal aim of its universities should be to develop intellectual independence (Section 268, 2, d, I, a. New Zealand Legislation, 2020). An academic definition in the context of intellectual independence as an educational goal is “To be intellectually independent is to assess, on one’s own, the soundness of the justification proposed for a knowledge claim.” (Aikenhead 1990, 132). In more common usage, intellectually-­ independent people choose to think for themselves. During some recent international collaborative research that we, the authors, were part of, a small group of researchers from India, Pakistan, USA, Austria and New Zealand explored elements of their own institutions’ commitment to independent thought (Shephard et al. 2021). We came to the conclusion that those institutions that were most eloquent in emphasising the importance of intellectual independence as an outcome from university experiences, from our own group, were from India and Pakistan. Beaconhouse National University of Pakistan, for example, aims to help its students “to learn and adopt values, and beliefs, based not upon authority or ignorance, whim or prejudice, but

2.3  Theoretical Underpinnings for the Analysis of Social Purpose

upon one’s own worthy evaluation of argument and evidence.” (Beaconhouse National University,11 2020, np). Azim Premji University, in India, with its clear institutional focus on social change, emphasises that “Education’s impact on society is through the changes in values and action that thinking, autonomous individuals are capable of.” (Azim Premji University,12 2014, np). Universities based elsewhere use their web pages to promote their own particular beliefs and priorities, and perhaps some overlap with the sentiments expressed above. Espoused commitment to intellectual independence as being at the heart of a university education is widely distributed. But how does intellectual independence, as a fundamental feature of university education, equate to the social purposes of universities, as identified in our previous paragraph that addressed UNESCO’s section 148 (UNESCO 1995, 3)? UNESCO advocates, for example, that universities should be “-a place of learning founded on quality and knowledge alone …” but goes on to add, in the same clause, “… which inculcates, particularly in the minds of its future graduates, commitment to the pursuit of knowledge and a sense of responsibility to place training at the service of social development”. How can intellectual independence co-exist with the inculcation of anything in particular, other than a commitment to independence? What if our students wish to use their intellectual independence for purposes other than commitment to a ‘sense of responsibility to place training at the service of social development’? What if they wish to use their intellectual independence to develop a sense of responsibility to place training at the service of their own family, rather than of social development in general? Maslow’s hierarchy of needs suggests that this should not be unexpected. Depending on how we conceptualise ideas such as training, education, teaching, inculcation and intellectual inde-

27

pendence, we have much to learn about how intellectual independence and social responsibility interact as educational objectives.

2.3 Theoretical Underpinnings for the Analysis of Social Purpose

It is one thing for UNESCO to develop an intellectual compass to guide its member states as they manage, enhance and create higher education institutions, but another to explore, in an academic sense, how well these ideas become manifest. These are complex ideas that lack clear definitions and common understanding. While university buildings can simply be measured and ticked off a list, university functions are more troubling to analyse. Certainly, what local legislatures mandate in statutes or what individual institutions say they aspire to in their webpages could not be said to be a sufficient academic analysis of what is happening. Such an analysis needs to be informed by academia’s own sincere commitment to research its practices. A range of theories will be used in this book to help analyse the social purposes of higher education, and what institutions say about such things. For example, UNESCO’s “-a place in which important local, regional, national and international issues and solutions are identified, debated and addressed in a spirit of learned criticism, and where the active participation of citizens in the debates on social, cultural and intellectual progress is encouraged; (UNESCO 1995, 148)” lays at the heart of what many would describe as the university’s role in community learning, or adult and continuing education, and very much part of its community engagement. But is this purpose to be achieved primarily through eminent academics giving public lectures to which members of the community are invited to listen, and perhaps to ask questions? Or might something more strenuous be involved? To help us analyse this particular element of a university’s purpose, the 11  h t t p : / / b e s t iva l . b n u . e d u . p k / M K T 2 0 1 9 / B N U _ theoretical construct of scholarship (Boyer 1996) Prospectus_18-­19_TOPICAL_1.pdf 12  https://azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/SitePages/vision-­ is proving valuable. The Scholarship of mission.aspx Engagement allows us to theorise and so analyse

28

and discuss the nature of community-engaged activities, and in particular challenge the idea of the public lecture as a sufficient response to the needs of societies for intellectual engagement with their universities. The French philosopher Bourdieu revolutionised thinking about education in the last century, with a particular focus on schools, but a general commentary on education’s tendency to reproduce the values and structures of the society that sponsors it. This, of course, shows a different countenance of education than that explicit within UNESCO’s intellectual compass, which emphasises social purpose as change, rather than reproduction. Bourdieu developed the intellectual tools of habitus, capital and field to explore how dominant or privileged groups in societies use their symbolic, cultural and economic capital to control the structures and operations of educational fields and the habitus of individuals within them, to support their dominant status in society (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992). Bourdieu’s social theory is a great asset to analyse social purpose, building on the earlier writing of Freire and Foucault. Bourdieusian social theory suggests that harnessing the power of universities to create social change will not be easy. Means will have to be found to overcome existing social purposes ingrained into the very being of these institutions. There appears no doubt that education in many parts of the world has increasingly been subject to neoliberal pressure. Although formal education, and perhaps particularly higher education, was initially a privilege for the wealthiest members of society, and so inherently market-­ driven, in some parts of the world in the twentieth century it became increasingly independent, and liberal, and subject more to the power of politicians than to the market.13 A common debate within nations nowadays is whether a higher education is primarily an individual benefit or a One of the authors of this book (KS) grew up in England and went to university in the 70s. His university tuition fees were paid by the UK State, and for some years he even had a ‘grant’ towards his living costs. He often wonders if he was, or is, worth it, from the perspective of ‘society’. 13 

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose

social benefit, and so, who should pay, or pay most. Nowadays higher education is, in many parts of the world, the very epitome of marketized operations. Students pay for their tuition, institutions vie for their position in international rankings and compete with one another for students, and management processes within them are forced to apply the rules of the market to what might otherwise be academic decisions. New Zealand’s seminal work on the roles and responsibilities of universities (Malcolm and Tarling 2007) uses the phrase “ … the relationship between the academic and the managerial. (203)” that will be an important descriptor for this book’s consideration of universities’ social purpose. Closely related to neoliberal theory and marketisation of higher education is the notion that access to it should be competitive, only available to the worthiest, as proven by individual’s previous hard work and educational success. Similarly, in line with this way of thinking, a principal educational product of higher education should be an acceptance of the social justice of meritocracy, or competitive individualism. A key message from higher education nowadays is that anyone who works hard enough should be successful. Unsuccessful people did not deserve success, or access to the advantages afforded by higher education. Brennan and Naidoo (2008) examined the theoretical and empirical literature on higher education’s role in relation to social equity and related notions of citizenship, social justice, social cohesion and meritocracy. They explored questions of what is learned in higher education in terms of values, identity, social responsibility and environmental awareness. A key question in this context is whether graduates are likely to be more concerned than non-graduates about such matters or if higher education’s agenda to promote competitive individualism makes this unlikely. Emphasising a dichotomy of aspiration between cooperation and competition, and with a focus on the roles and responsibilities of higher education, Kreber (2009), in reviewing different rationales for and perspectives on internationalisation in higher education, suggested that; “While the political, cultural, and academic rationales are based on an

2.3  Theoretical Underpinnings for the Analysis of Social Purpose

29

ethos of cooperation, the ­economic one is based on In one sense this book attempts the impossible. an ethos of competition” (4). Kreber expressed Universities frame themselves as rational elements concern that curricula will increasingly relate to in chaotic social and political systems. Societies economic imperatives and fail to serve a more pro- look to their universities for truth, no matter how found educational purpose in, as examples, foster- uncomfortable it may be. By situating their analying international understanding and action towards sis within and alongside universities authors are in those most in need. And, to be frank, Bourdieusian danger of suggesting that the decisions that those analysis of education systems over many years within universities make are rational and can be interprets meritocracy, or positive relationship explored by rational, academic, means. A signifibetween hard work and success, as merely justifi- cant literature in the social sciences (the affective cation for some peoples’ low status and conceptu- turn) explores affect, or emotion, in our judgealises how education systems might be reproducing ments and proclamations, and does so in academic ideological beliefs that reinforce low-status indi- ways. Privilege and agency are central to any disviduals’ acceptance of their lower position in soci- course on social justice, and the concept of affect ety. Social purpose has some problems to address, is intimately bound to manifestations of privilege but some helpful social theories to support its and to individual’s agency, or lack of. Clegg (2013) analysis also exist. argues that “affect is simultaneously erased and This book will also draw on insights from managed in ways that serve to bolster privilege in critical theory to analyse the ways in which the academy (72)”. Our Sustainable Development higher education achieves its social purposes or Goals, the claims made by institutions to further might do so. In 1978, Mezirow published his them, expectations voiced by those who wish early ideas about perspective transformation, higher education to change in this way or that, and incorporating consciousness raising, re-­the aspirations of many that relate to the wellexamining cultural assumptions, structural being of others are all deeply affective in nature change in the ways people see themselves and and potentially subject to the erasure and managetheir relationships, and behavioural change. ment that Clegg describes. Our chapters, and the Mezirow draws strongly from Freire’s concept of literary devices within them, attempt to distinguish conscientization with links to personal action and emotion from rationality, affect from cognition, social change. “When a meaning perspective can and highlight where affect is being manipulated. no longer comfortably deal with anomalies in a Somewhat less theoretical are the impact meanew situation, a transformation may occur” sures adopted by the Times Higher Education (Mezirow 1978, 104). And Mezirow emphasises Impact Rankings mentioned above. Although that learning experiences extend far beyond sim- each SDG has its own United Nations approved ple acquisition of new knowledge. “A new mean- targets and indicators, these impact rankings ask ing perspective has dimensions of thought, higher education institutions to describe what feeling and will” (Mezirow 1978, 105), empha- their contribution might be towards each, and sising that this book will need to be interested in award points for things that THE considers helpboth cognition and affect. Mezirow went on to ful. At the time of writing, 2022, the impact rankdevelop his theory of transformative learning, to ings are in their 4th year and the methodology emphasise that combinations of experience, has been developing each year. For example, for reflection and critical thinking are necessary to SDG 17 (partnerships for the goals), the metric help adults “discover a need to acquire new per- previously asked for a commitment to meaningspectives in order to gain a more complete under- ful education around the SDGs across the universtanding of changing events” (Mezirow 1991, 3). sity, in some or all programmes, resulting in This notion of critical thinking being applied via considerable debate internationally about what, reflection to experiences will be important to the precisely, ‘meaningful’ meant. The 2022 analysis analysis of social purpose, particularly via teach- now rewards institutions with dedicated courses ing and learning. that address sustainability and the SDGs and

30

have dedicated educational outreach activities for the wider community on or about the SDGs.14 It is interesting to speculate if, as seems likely, this form of competition has an impact on the social impact of universities, and what theoretical constructs could be used to analyse this impact. The next section provides three brief case studies of social purposes from around the world, as a prelude to their further analysis throughout the book.

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose

universities, and of course much greater if based on entry-to-school statistics. Widening participation in higher education has not necessarily been encouraged for its own sake but rather as a means to promote greater social justice represented, for example, by enhanced social mobility, or the ability of individuals to succeed in society irrespective of the social class within which they were born. In a very real sense, efforts to widening participation represent a government strategy to harness the 2.4 Case Studies of Social power of higher education for social change, in Purpose in Action line with clear data that relates attendance in higher education to many socially desirable traits, The following section does not attempt to pro- including lifelong earning power. Government vide a comprehensive coverage of these areas of efforts in these directions are also supported by interest, but rather seeks to illustrate the themes some professions, to create professional workaddressed in this chapter and introduce ideas that forces that represent the societies that they serve. will be explored in more detail later in this book. Medicine is perhaps particularly active in this area (see for example, Cleland et al. 2012). Even so, we should be aware that the construct of wid2.4.1 On Widening Participation ening participation is intensely political and in Higher Education based on a range of philosophical interpretations Institutions in England15 of social justice. Sheeran et al. (2007), for example, highlight meritocratic and democratic explaHigher education in the UK has long been aware nations for widening participation and force the that those who attend undergraduate degrees are authors of this book to reconsider their own pernot truly representative of the wider population. spectives on the roles and responsibilities of It has been recognised that students from low-­ education. income families, mature students, disabled stuWidening participation has been addressed dents and students from some ethnic groups have through institutions’ own activities and strategies lower participation rates than students from other (in particular emphasising financial support and groups. To some extent higher education has outreach activities to target minorities), through been essentially a middle-class enterprise. One the work of the Office for Fair Access (and more particularly stark statistic suggests that, in 2016, recently through the Office for Students) and average progression rates of final-year students through institutional funding processes (for from state schools in England to university was example as part of a National Collaborative 64%, while from independent (private) schools it Outreach Programme). At various points in the was 81%.16 The discrepancy is even wider to elite past decade, extra financial support has been provided for students from families with an income below a certain level. Even so, there is a sense in which ‘widening participation’ is being done to 14  https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-­ institutions, rather than with them; and there are university-­r ankings/impact-rankings-2022-new- differences in how policies are enacted by differmethodology-announced ent institutions, leading to claims of reproduction 15  Much of this brief summary was informed in particular of university hierarchies in the UK, as well as by Connell-Smith and Hubble (2018). 16  https://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/ social inequalities more generally (Evans et  al. 2019/12/AccesstoAdvantage-2018.pdf 2019).

2.4  Case Studies of Social Purpose in Action

Overall, efforts to widen participation had been successful in the 5 years before 2016, in that the number of disadvantaged young people entering higher education had risen in the previous decade, despite a very significant increase in tuition fees in 2012. Entry rates of young people from black ethnic backgrounds, for example, increased 42% between 2009 and 2015. But most authorities recognised that aspects of progress had been very slow and some groups remained persistently under-represented, including older students and young white males from the lowest socioeconomic sectors of society. Indeed, statistics in 2017 demonstrated that although participation from disadvantaged groups had increased, the participation gap between the least advantaged and the most advantaged had also increased, in line with an overall increase in participation. Higher education was still the prerogative of the privileged and perhaps even increasingly so. In 2016 the Social Mobility Commission’s annual ‘State of the nation report’17 suggested that the UK had a deep socialmobility problem which was getting worse. It highlighted an unfair education system as a fundamental barrier to social mobility. In 2017 the UK’s government set out to maximise the use of education as a tool for social mobility with renewed vigour. Higher Education Institutions in England became required to publish their admissions, attainment and retention data (by gender, ethnicity and social economic background). The level of tuition fees that they could charge became dependent on approved access agreements that set out how individual institutions would increase admission and support progression by students from disadvantaged backgrounds. And many students from lower-­ income families and underrepresented groups received bursaries, fee waivers or a scholarship. Institutions were also supported by funding from the Student Opportunity Fund based on the number of students from disadvantaged backgrounds that they had enrolled. Efforts to widen participation continue. Access to elite institutions is probably one of the most significant long-term issues.

31

Although most of the government-led initiatives in this area relate to student participation, and, in particular, to entry into higher education, key questions also relate to how well minority students get on at university once there, and to the socioeconomic origins and status of the university teachers who they encounter there. On the first issue, there have been long-standing concerns that higher education is dumbing down to accept minority students, on the basis that at least some of these have lower educational attainments. For example, a significant research effort explores the experiences of first-generation students18 in higher education, and academic writing standards is a particularly contentious issue in this context (see for example, French 2013). Negative experiences of working-class students in largely middle-class elite institutions are similarly of relevance to the widening participation strategy (Reay 2021; Hindle et al. 2021). And, as the distribution of students from disadvantaged backgrounds is not uniform within the diversity of higher education institutions, these notions of quality are also used to identify differences in the sector itself, perpetuating the categorisation of ‘elite’ and ‘other’ universities. The second issue is a natural consequence of the first. How universities select and promote their academics influences the class and ethnicity make-up of educational institutions and potentially perpetuates inequities. The BBC recently reported that only 155 from 23,000 university professors in the UK are black,19 a considerably lower proportion than in wider society.

2.4.2 How Is India’s New Education Policy Attempting to Address the Challenges in India’s Education? As noted in a previous section, the key concern currently in India is the quality of education. There is a perception of the persistence of poor Generally referring to students whose parents did not attend college or university, but with varying definitions. 19  https://www.bbc.com/news/education-55723120 18 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ state-of-the-nation-2016 17 

32

quality in both school and higher education. There are annual reports of the learning achievements of children in schools of different states, and these note that the majority of students have not acquired the proficiency that they are expected to have in the grade that they study. The dropout from secondary schools especially of girls and boys from poorer and marginalised groups is also a major concern. The other major challenge is the unemployment among those who have acquired some level of higher education or the lack of connection between higher education and the employment for the majority of students. All these point towards the inappropriate quality of education. The New Education Policy20 which is accepted by the government of India plans to address almost all major challenges that its education system encounters. Some of the major features of the new policy are the following: • It makes Early Childhood Education (ECE) part of the formal education and plans to integrate with schools. This is based on a recognition of the importance of the ECE in the cognitive development of children and their life-long careers. • It intends to take steps to make 8–10  years schooling universal and covering all children. • It identifies poorer learning achievements in Indian schools as a major challenge and outlines different strategies for this purpose. • It plans to change the nature of teacher education. It wants to integrate teacher training with liberal higher education in universities. • It plans to reform higher education. The plan is that students can exit higher education after 1  year with a certificate or 2  years with a diploma or 3 years with a degree, 4 years with a honours degree and 5 years with a postgraduate degree. • It aims at categorising universities into those which mainly focus on teaching and those that do research. All colleges would be encouraged and supported to be autonomous in their award of degrees. Hence the system of affiliating colhttps://www.education.gov.in/en

20 

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose

leges with a university for the purpose of conducting examinations and awarding degrees that exists in India would be changed. • It advocates for the allocation of nearly 6% of the GDP for education. The implementation of the policy requires the allocation of more public resources for education. That is the reason for advocating the use of 6% of the GDP towards this purpose. However, this is unlikely to happen in the near future. This is due to the competing demands for poverty reduction and other social needs. The COVID crisis brought out the limitations of India’s healthcare system. There is a need for a lot more public investment in healthcare too. The overall quantum of public resources is also limited due to the low tax/GDP ratio in India. Improving the quality of education has to be through a gradual process. This is so since the poorer quality in the past will have an impact on the current ability to improve the quality. This is especially so in a context where there is a rapid expansion of education. India currently needs millions of school teachers. India’s problems with the learning achievements in school education are not recent. A major section of the current cohort of school teachers is the product of the not-so-good-quality school education of the recent past. This can limit the ability of these teachers to improve the quality. This is also the situation of teacher educators. India witnessed a rapid expansion of teacher-education colleges, but there is a recognition of the poorer quality of the majority of these colleges. This limits the creation of quality teacher-educators. This will have a bearing on the quality of teacher training for many more years. All these may continue to impact the pace of progress in India’s education. Efforts to improve the quality of education also require an enabling economic environment. This connection is reflected in the enrolment in higher education. Many students who are not that interested in college education go for it mainly due to the non-availability of decent jobs. This is primarily driven by the slow pace of manufacturing and due to the nature of industrial employment in the country. Indian labour market is, by

2.4  Case Studies of Social Purpose in Action

and large, fragmented into (a) jobs in agriculture or less-skilled work in activities like construction which are in the informal-employment sector; (b) service-sector jobs in the private sector or government and most of these require higher levels of education. Hence those who complete schooling successfully are compelled to go for higher education whether they are interested or not. This has a bearing on the quality of higher education. The lack of enough jobs after completing education may discourage some children from completing school education too. The New Education Policy has much to say about how higher education will contribute to change. Section 10.1 confirms that “The main thrust of this policy regarding higher education is to end the fragmentation of higher education by transforming higher education institutions into large multidisciplinary universities, colleges, and HEI clusters/ Knowledge Hubs, each of which will aim to have 3,000 or more students.” On Equity and inclusion, Section 14.1 “… envisions ensuring equitable access to quality education to all students, with a special emphasis on SEDGs [Socio-­ Economically Disadvantaged Groups]”. Section 14.4.1 promises, as examples, to establish “more high-quality HEIs in aspirational districts and Special Education Zones containing larger numbers of SEDGs” and to “Develop and support high-quality HEIs that teach in local/Indian languages or bilingually”. Section 15.4, on teacher education, suggests that all “multidisciplinary universities and colleges – will aim to establish education departments which, besides carrying out cutting-edge research in various aspects of education, will also run B.Ed.”. Section 16.4, on vocational education, “aims to overcome the social status hierarchy associated with vocational education and requires integration of vocational education programmes into mainstream education in all education institutions in a phased manner. Section 16.5 suggests that by 2025, “at least 50% of learners through the school and higher education system shall have exposure to vocational education”. The changes envisaged, and the rate of change hoped for, are extraordinary. In summary, the New Education Policy identifies almost all major challenges of India’s educa-

33

tion system and proposes solutions. However, the implementation of these solutions or the achievement of their positive results may take time even if there is a political will to go ahead with the proposals which are outlined in the policy document. Since education is a ‘concurrent subject’ in India, and hence the decisions/actions of both the central and state governments are crucial, political will at the central/federal level may prove a limiting factor.

2.4.3 Addressing Treaty of Waitangi Obligations and Demographic Inequities in Aotearoa New Zealand Recent years have seen a resurgence of interest in and commitment to the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi signed between Maori and the British. At the same time, it has become apparent that the population of Aotearoa New Zealand is changing, with the proportion of the population descended from European settlers declining and the proportion of Pacific Islands descent and Asian descent increasing. And yet attendance at university does not reflect either Maori aspirations for partnership, endorsed by the Treaty of Waitangi, or the aspirations of, in particular, Pacifica people for equitable access to higher education, to the professions, to jobs, and to health care, social support and social inclusion in general. A recent analysis by New Zealand’s Productivity Commission21 suggests that while the numbers of students enrolled in tertiary education as a whole might broadly reflect ethnicity proportions in the population, a higher proportion of Asian and European ethnicities study at universities (based on EFTS, rather than numbers) and that completion rates for Maori and Pasifika students in universities are lower than they are for those of European descent. There certainly are some parallels with widening participation issues in the UK and both situations should in some ways be associated with the consequences of colonisahttps://www.productivity.govt.nz/assets/Documents/ 476bafcc14/Issues-paper-v3.pdf 21 

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose

34

tion, a social class system and persistent socioeconomic disadvantage. As with widening participation in the UK, responses to the situation come from government and from individual institutions and involve targeted funding, obligations to gather and communicate ethnicity-based data, and national mandated strategic priorities that universities, and other providers, must adhere to.22 One perspective on this complex issue has been provided in 2018 by Universities NZ (New Zealand’s Universities’ representative body)23 with a focus on parity of access and graduation, that has proved helpful in writing this short case study. This situation in New Zealand appears to be more than an equity issue of natural justice with respect to participation in public institutions. Overall, the strategies espoused and enacted point to an acceptance by many that social change at a national level is required, and that universities have their part to play in this, not only by enrolling and graduating more students from disadvantaged groups, but also by changing the hearts and minds of all citizens touched by a higher education experience to fair or equitable ends. An educational priority for all institutions is, for example, to incorporate the Maori language into the everyday life of the place of learning in a meaningful way. Notably, there is acceptance by some that claims by Maori are different from those of Pacifica. Parity of access and graduation is the key equity issue for both Maori and Pacifica, but fairness also relates to the terms of the Treaty with Maori and is likely far more challenging to achieve. In the context of achieving parity, Universities NZ propose that “systematically addressing the needs of one group is likely to generate the approaches and solutions that will address the needs of all other underrepresented groups at university.” Universities NZ emphasise that parity gaps do not only exist at the university level, they

are significant in the ‘pipeline’ from compulsory education as well, suggesting that changes at university level will not solve the problem and indicating that a multisector approach will be necessary. Nevertheless, Universities NZ does point out significant parity gaps in universities, particularly in first year success, and identifies means to address these (including, in particular, culturally-appropriate support during the initial months at university, foundation and/or bridging programmes before entering full-time first-year studies, and both pastoral care and academic support). All universities adopt these and other measures to varying degrees. Universities NZ also emphasise the imperative that institutions research (evaluate) their practices and share practices that work. Institutional strategies appear to broadly embrace these recommendations. Institutions initiate, organise and communicate their strategies internally and externally in various ways. The University of Otago, for example, has both a Maori Strategic Framework24 and a Pacific Strategic Framework25 in the public domain. The University of Auckland incorporates much of its thinking in this area in Taumata Teitei, the University of Auckland Vision 2030 and Strategic Plan 2025.26 It is beyond the remit of this brief case study to attempt an analysis of these documents, but it is not clear whether these strategic instruments are essentially instructions to the academic communities involved, or educational strategies designed to influence the values and attitudes of those to whom they refer. And, given the lack of educational research or evaluation inherent to this broad issue in New Zealand universities, the extent to which the hearts and minds of educational communities are changing in response to them is uncertain. A key issue for Aotearoa New Zealand in the context of its Treaty

https://www.otago.ac.nz/maori/otago667421.pdf https://www.otago.ac.nz/pacific-at-otago/about/ otago088124.pdf 26  https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/assets/auckland/about-us/ t h e - u n ive r s i t y / o ffi c i a l - p u b l i c a t i o n s / s t r a t eg i c -­ plan/2021-2030/taumata-teitei-vision-2030-and-­­ strategic-plan-2025.pdf 24 

25 

https://assets.education.govt.nz/public/Documents/ NELP-TES-documents/NELP-TES-summary-page.pdf 23  https://www.universitiesnz.ac.nz/sites/default/files/ UNZ%20Parity%20Discussion%20Paper%20One%20 %28Aug%202018%29.pdf 22 

References

of Waitangi and notions of partnership is the place of mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) in formal education. Seven professors from the University of Auckland shook Aotearoa New Zealand’s university world recently, by questioning parity for mātauranga Māori with other bodies of knowledge.27 These issues are complex and of international relevance. Academic engagement in them is vital if we are to make progress.

2.5 Conclusions It would be impossible to conclude that universities around the world did not have social purposes. Social purpose is embedded within their being. Precisely what these purposes are and how, and how well, universities achieve these social purposes is something else. Our case studies illustrate a diversity of social purposes, extending from changes in participation in higher education to changes in society itself, and a diversity of approaches to achieve them involving changes in participation, pedagogy, research and community engagement as well as the development of institutions with specified social purposes. Extending these case studies into the changes that will be needed to achieve the SDGs suggests that further changes will need to be extensive. Higher education as a means to reproduce the existing values and structures of the society that sponsors it will not suffice. Higher education as an agent of social change is a commonly espoused aspirational theme, but how this aspiration becomes realised is far from clear at present.

References Aikenhead GS (1990) Scientific/technological literacy, critical reasoning, and classroom practice. In: Norris SP, Phillips LM (eds) Foundations of literacy policy in Canada. Calgary, Detselig

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/447898/ university-academics-claim-matauranga-maori-notscience-­sparks-controversy 27 

35 Bourdieu P, Wacquant L (1992) An invitation to reflexive sociology. Polity Press, Cambridge Boyer EL (1996) From scholarship reconsidered to scholarship assessed. Quest 48(2):129–139. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00336297.1996.10484184 Brennan J, Naidoo R (2008) Higher education and the achievement (and/or prevention) of equity and social justice. High Educ 56(3):287–302 Clegg S (2013) The space of academia: privilege, agency and the erasure of affect. In: Privilege, agency and affect. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi. org/10.1057/9781137292636_5 Cleland JA, Dowell J, McLachlan J, Nicholson S, Patterson F (2012) Identifying best practice in the selection of medical students. General Medical Council. Retrieved from https://www.gmc-­uk.org/about/what-­we-­do-­and-­ why/data-­and-­research/research-­and-­insight-­archive/ identifying-­best-­practice-­in-­the-­selection-­of-­medical-­ students Connell-Smith A, Hubble S (2018) Widening participation strategy in higher education in England. House of commons library briefing paper 820424, January 2018 Education Review Office (2020) Nihinihi Whenua – valuing te reo Māori: student and whānau aspirations. https://www.ero.govt.nz/publications/ nihinihi-­whenua/ Evans C, Rees G, Taylor C, Wright C (2019) ‘Widening access’ to higher education: the reproduction of university hierarchies through policy enactment. J Educ Policy 34(1):101–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/026809 39.2017.1390165 French A (2013) ‘Let the right ones in!’: Widening participation, academic writing and the standards debate in higher education. Power Educ 5(3):236–247. https:// doi.org/10.2304/power.2013.5.3.236 Hindle C, Boliver V, Maclarnon A, McEwan C, Simpson B, Brown H (2021) Experiences of first-­generation scholars at a highly selective UK university. Learning Teach 14(2):1–31. https://doi.org/10.3167/ latiss.2021.140202 ISCED (2011) ISCED level 6 bachelor’s or equivalent level http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/ documents/international-­standard-­classification-­of-­ education-­isced-­2011-­en.pdf Section 224 Kreber C (2009) Different perspectives on internationalization in higher education. New Dir Teach Learn 2009:1–14 Kumar K (2021) Evaluating Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad as a new social movement. Soc Sci Humanit Open 4(1):100156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ssaho.2021.100156 Malcolm W, Tarling N (2007) Crisis of identity? The mission and management of universities in New Zealand Wellington. Dunmore McClendon D, Hackett C, Potančoková M, Stonawski M, Skirbekk V (2016) Women's education in the Muslim world. Popul Dev Rev 44(2):311–342 Mezirow J (1978) Perspective transformation. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/ pdf/10.1177/074171367802800202

36 Mezirow J (1991) Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco Newman JH (1907) The idea of a university: defined and illustrated. Longmans, Green and Co, London Oliver JS, Nichols BK (2001) Intellectual independence as a persistent theme in the literature of science education: 1900–1950. School Sci Math 101(1): 49–59 Reay D (2021) The working classes and higher education: meritocratic fallacies of upward mobility in the United Kingdom. Eur J Educ 56(1):53–64. https://doi. org/10.1111/ejed.12438

2  Universities and Their Social Purpose Sheeran Y, Brown BJ, Baker S (2007) Conflicting philo sophies of inclusion: the contestation of knowledge in widening participation. Lond Rev Educ 5. https://doi. org/10.1080/14748460701661302 Shephard K, Thondhlana G, Wolff L-A, Belluigi DZ, Rieckmann M, Vega-Marcote P (2021) On the nature of quality in the contexts of academic publication and sustainability. Front Educ 6:634473. https://doi. org/10.3389/feduc.2021.634473 UNESCO (1995) Policy paper for change and development in higher education. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ ark:/48223/pf0000098992

3

Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

3.1 Higher Education and Social Stratification It will come as no surprise to readers that not everyone goes to university to get a degree. Many either choose not to, are not able to apply to do so, are not selected to be able to, or cannot afford to. Some estimates of the proportion of young people in some nations who do attend university were provided in previous chapters, and although the proportion is variable, it does not approach 100% anywhere. Whether or not this is a desirable state of affairs likely relates to the political opinions of those being consulted but, for many, rules of thumb, or heuristic shortcuts, provide helpful questions. Does participation in higher education broadly reflect the structure of society, in terms of: gender; ethnicity; class or caste; socioeconomic status; and perhaps other considerations including age, disability and sexual-­orientation? And if it does not, is there something about the structure of society, or of the university system itself, that prevents it being so? Inherent to these questions is the suspicion, or reality, that higher education in the past, internationally, has served the interests of elites in society, be they males, upper/ middle class/caste, or simply wealthy; and specifically, not served the interests of those excluded. That higher education might be a key part of a nation’s hegemonic-­being is a possibility worth considering.

We should not assume, of course, that higher education only impacts on those members of society who actively participate within it. One category of university graduates, for example, has a much broader impact; school teachers in most educational systems are a small minority of all university graduates, but we hope that they go on to have a huge impact in the community in which they teach. Even if only elite students get to university, they may even so have broad societal impacts that could result in decreasing social stratification. We should be particularly interested in how these graduates choose to contribute to society, and where they choose to do this. These are important questions for later in this chapter. Nevertheless, evidence is gathering to suggest that university experiences have significant impacts on those who do participate, and graduate, that not only influence what they do in their chosen career or profession but likely also have significant impacts on the society that they integrate within. Our graduates go on to be important citizens in society through diverse processes. That graduates have a lifelong earnings-premium over non-graduates is widely reported and believed. One additional significant line of inquiry over several years has asked if university experiences have direct effect on, for example, the sustainability attributes of graduates (Cotton and Alcock 2013) or on the distribution of liberal views in societies (Scott 2022). Although such

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_3

37

38

3  Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

research finds it difficult to be categorical about impact, it does appear that some impact is real and perhaps could be extended. It should be concluded that participation in higher education is important for social change, but who gets to participate and the nature of that participation are also important factors.

Currently, the tertiary education system does not work well for many Māori, Pacific, disabled and low-income learners. ... Our goal is to achieve system level equity in terms of patterns of participation and achievement for all tertiary learners (np).

3.2 Societal Ambitions to Widen Participation Whatever the current situation is internationally, at least at a political, governmental level, nations say that they are not happy with it. India’s 2020 New Education Policy1 is unequivocal about its intentions to make higher education available to all students; 14.1. Entry into quality higher education can open a vast array of possibilities that can lift both individuals as well as communities out of the cycles of disadvantage. For this reason, making quality higher education opportunities available to all individuals must be among the highest priorities. This Policy envisions ensuring equitable access to quality education to all students, with a special emphasis on SEDGs. [Socio-economically disadvantaged groups] (41)

New Zealand's legislation is slightly less precise in this context, but nevertheless emphasises the need for equity of access to all tertiary education in its 2020 Education and Training Act;

The UK has a long history of widening participation, but it is challenging to be specific about its precise intentions long term. Equitable participation irrespective of ethnicity, socioeconomic background and disability was initially combined with a perception that university experience was an essentially good thing for the nation, and worth pursuing to increase the proportion of young people who get a degree and so enhance their lifelong earning-power. Increasing social mobility is a related, but subtly different objective, emphasised by the UK Government in 20173 with a focus on reducing unequal-opportunities for individuals and a devotion to principles of meritocracy. Talent and hard work alone should determine how far people can go in life, whoever you are, wherever you are from. Secretary of State for Education (2017, 6)

More recently though, increasing emphasis has been placed on university courses most able to contribute to national priorities, on institutions most able to provide these, and on students most able to benefit. One higher education policy analyst suggests;

Section 252 (Objectives of Part 4) (1)(a) fosters, in ways that are consistent with the efficient use of national resources, high-quality learning and research outcomes, equity of access, and innovation; and… (Education and Training Act 2020, section 252)

Notably New Zealand’s Tertiary Education Strategy2 draws on its Education and Training Act to provide more specificity, emphasising not only equity of access, but also equitable ‘patterns of achievement’, and it is specific about the groups being targeted;

https://www.education.gov.in/en https://www.tec.govt.nz/focus/our-focus/oritetangatertiary-success-for-everyone/ 1  2 

In times when a continued appetite for expansion is not certain, the mechanics of participation change. It is no longer a zero sum game, and all recruitment is done with a lingering sense that the Westminster government feels that some students, at some providers, should not be at university at all. (Kernohan 2022, np)

One of the measures that may be used to limit participation in particular courses may be the proportion of graduates going onto managerial or professional employment. Courses that fail to attract, or fail to graduate, students who generally go on to ‘successful careers’ may be capped. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/667690/ Social_Mobility_Action_Plan_-_for_printing.pdf 3 

3.3  Causes of Higher Education Elitism

Another measure may be government-stipulated minimum entry requirements. In some senses, higher education’s plans for equitable participation have gone in full circle. Back in 1995, when UNESCO members were debating the roles and responsibilities of universities, full participation was not emphasised as much as intellectual merit and adequate preparation. In 1995, universities were to be; a place to which access is possible primarily on the basis of intellectual merit and of the ability to participate actively in its programmes, with due attention to ensuring social equity; (UNESCO 1995, section 148, 3). We shall return to the issue of participation as a democratic right or as a meritocratic privilege later in the chapter, but for now we note that many universities maintain their own lists of priority groups. The University of Otago, New Zealand, specifies the following equity groups4 to which it will prioritise its support; • Students and staff with disability and/or impairment • Students who are first in their family to attend university • LGBTTIQA+ students and staff • Students from low socio-economic backgrounds • Students and staff from migrant and/or refugee backgrounds and those whose first language is not English • Women where there are barriers to access and/ or success.

3.3 Causes of Higher Education Elitism Given the complexity of participation patterns in universities internationally it may be somewhat over optimistic to present a section title that highhttps://www.otago.ac.nz/administration/policies/ otago666398.html 4 

39

lights the causes of educational elitism. But there may be patterns of behaviour and means of analysis that will support our understanding. Elitism in higher education is perhaps best studied and understood in the USA. One recent analysis published in Times Higher Education (Basken 2022, based on an interview with Daniel Hirschman, from Cornell University) produces an interesting fact. It suggests that the USA’s Supreme Court is minded to ban affirmative action within university admission processes. Many universities in the USA have historically been highly selective in who they admit, contributing to situations where the student populations in these institutions are anything but representative of the wider population. Positive discrimination, as affirmative action, in favour of poorly represented groups has been an important contribution to liberal-leaning institutions to redress historical selection biases. The interesting fact is not so much that the USA Supreme Court is likely to ban this approach, but that “… eight of the nine current justices attended Harvard or Yale law schools.” (Basken 2022, 9). The point being that highly-selective institutions are the training grounds for the next generation of elites; emphasising the complexity of participation in any analysis of the social purposes of universities. Racism, sexism, elitism may all be involved as both conscious and unconscious bias. Inherited privilege, power differentials and hegemony are all part of the daily lives of those who exist in higher education today. These possibilities have recently been explored in detail for higher education in the USA by Baum and McPherson (2022). Their analysis suggests that higher education is not necessarily the primary cause of inequality in that nation, but perhaps is more part of the problem than part of the solution at present. They suggest that elite institutions select the most capable students, who are also the easiest to teach, leaving more challenging teaching and learning tasks to other institutions least resourced to do so; and that which kind of university or college students attend is predicted strongly by how well-educated their parents were. Even so, their analysis points to systematic disadvantage being accrued by some students early in the education system, long

40

before they reach college, and that the earnings premium of obtaining a college degree perpetuates inequality of opportunity in subsequent generations. There are, of course, parallels in other nations. In India, even though there are many universities and colleges only a small number would be recognised as elite. Gaining admission in such institutions is highly competitive and may require a very high score in entrance examinations. In order to get such a high score, almost all students go through the ‘coaching industry’. Entrance examinations use multiple-choice questions, and the speed with which a student can answer the questions matters for higher scores, and this is where the coaching industry is important. Coaching institutions are expensive directly and indirectly (since people may need to send children to cities with better coaching facilities). This means that it is affordable to only those families which have a high level of disposable income. In some subjects where there are not enough places compared to the demand (as in the case of medicine), it is those who can spend the money and go through coaching who can get in, and others may not get in. Though there is a quota for lower castes, this system favours the economically affluent even amongst these castes. Elitism in higher education may be even more complex in India and in other nations that in some respects identify as post-colonial. The perils of being indigenous in particular in these contexts have been addressed, for example, by Santhakumar et al. (2020) for higher education in India and for nations in South America, such as Colombia. Indigenous groups, lower castes and people from remote, undeveloped areas are poorly represented in higher education in these countries (Santhakumar et al. 2020). Limits to participation in higher education extend beyond socio-economic deprivation, prejudice and language. Limitations to Māori and Pacifica participation in universities in Aotearoa New Zealand, may be expressions of cultural mismatches between how people from some cultures learn and engage with others, and mainstream, conventional international ideas about how universities should operate. Such differences

3  Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

lead to different calls for change, in some cases demanding the inclusion of more ‘indigeneity’ within higher education, but in other cases simply calling for more access to conventional universities for indigenous or marginalised people (Santhakumar et al. 2020). Such analysis calls into question the nature of the social purposes that universities have, certainly in the context of who gets to participate in universities, but also with respect to how such participation occurs. Who decides? If indigenous groups, lower castes and socio-economically deprived peoples currently see advantage in equity of access to a mainstream university that has evolved to support the elites of a nation, is this acceptable to all concerned? Perhaps calls for bespoke higher-education that focuses on the cultures of minorities and excluded groups need to come from the current beneficiaries of exclusion, rather than from those excluded.

3.4 Some Philosophical Considerations Taken to its logical extreme, we might wonder if every person in a democratic society should go to university to get a degree. If they do not, we have to conceptualise ‘why not?’ in some meaningful way. This is not an easy task and Sheeran et al. (2007) emphasise that the philosophies of inclusion are frequently not explicit within government policies and research analyses. These authors helpfully critique lines of reasoning from a diverse range of sources relating to widening participation in higher education, or inclusion. They suggest two broadly different categories, or ‘philosophies of inclusion’. The first, a meritocratic position, is simultaneously broadly reformist at the same time as being essentially conservative, with a clear emphasis on providing higher-educational experiences to a subset of the wider population with an emphasis on those believed to be most suitable in terms of proven talent, and disposition to work hard. The second, a democratic position, aims to provide higher education experiences to more people irrespective of proven talent, ability or

3.5  How Societies and Universities Are Seeking to Widen Participation in Higher Education

propensity to work hard. Sheeran et  al. (2007) suggest that this democratic position may be driven by a desire to get a greater proportion of the population into education-driven economic productivity, or be driven by conceptions of higher education as providing an emancipatory or transformative experience accessible by all, but in particular by socially marginalised people. This latter, democratic, perspective highlights the potential role of higher education in transforming societies to be more liberal, democratic, inclusive and egalitarian. It is strongly influenced by the critical theory work of Mezirow and Freire. In the context of widening participation, it is clear that meritocratic positions and democratic positions are, politically, poles apart. They give rise to fundamentally different perspectives on higher education’s position within democratic societies and on higher education’s roles and responsibilities in these societies. Perhaps these differences are most marked with respect to the prior educational experiences deemed necessary for entry into higher education. A meritocratic position might anticipate demonstration of prior success and so deservedness to participate. A democratic position might suggest that prior academic performance is itself more a product of social inequalities inherent to our societies rather than to some innate difference in talent. The impact of social inequalities is a common theme in research relating to participation and inclusion in higher education. Reay researches these issues in the UK and has developed the term ‘meritocratic fallacies’ to draw attention to the problems encountered by, in particular, working-­class students in the UK’s universities (Reay 2021). It seems likely that working-class students are seriously disadvantaged both before and during higher education, for example, by their lack of access to privileged social networks. Along the same lines, doubts have been expressed about whether a working-class student’s degree is worth as much as a middle or upper-class student’s degree. Compounding this fraught issue are matters of differentiation between different institutions. By many measures, not all universities have the same status. Some are much more difficult to get into than others, based on a range

41

of criteria. Working class students, for a range of reasons, find it easier to get into some institutions than into others. Shephard (2016) analysed international research into these matters as a means to better understand participation in higher education in Aotearoa New Zealand and to explore how institutional hierarchy might be embedded in social structures, in particular though the earnings premium of graduates. The use of mean earnings in representing an earnings premium is likely to hide considerable diversity. It would be incorrect to suggest that academic critique of widening participation only addresses the problems inherent to meritocratic positions. It may be necessary to dig deeper within the literature to uncover criticism of democratic positions, for example in the context of critical theory, but it does exist. One analysis in Times Higher Education, reporting on a conference ran by the Society for Research into Higher Education, (Grove 2011), asked if widening access was imposing middle-class values on everyone, and reported points of view suggesting variously; that university is not the only place to become educated, that not everyone aspires to being middle-­ class, and that there is nothing wrong with being working class. At this stage, readers would do well to consider their own positions on these matters, as indeed the authors have whilst writing and discussing this chapter. Our own experience suggests that we do have positions, but do not necessarily hold them with pride. Logic and emotion are both challenged by the complex and fundamental questions that seek to rationalise who is best served by university experiences, and how our societies are best served by the inevitability that not everyone gets to go to university.

3.5 How Societies and Universities Are Seeking to Widen Participation in Higher Education All analyses of inequitable participation in higher education that we have seen do emphasise that higher education is neither the sole cause of inequity, nor its only solution. Whatever

3  Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

42

your political perspective on the issue, few should doubt that society and prior education impacts on young people before they even consider applying for university. In the context of addressing the social impacts of universities, considering attempts to modify participation patterns will only take us so far. Nevertheless, governmental, societal and institutional approaches that seek to widen participation in our universities, at the level of the university, are the focus of this section. There is a sense in which the intentions of our governments and universities towards, for example, equity, are addressed within the wide range of mission statements and strategies that often appear within the public domain. Many, for our case-study nations of the UK, India and Aotearoa New Zealand, have been mentioned previously. We should be in no doubt about the good intentions expressed by these bodies, although we might wonder about the extent to which those who have written or approved them have actually considered their philosophical position or likelihood of success. India’s resolve to make “… quality higher education opportunities available to all individuals5” and Aotearoa’s goal “… to achieve system level equity in terms of patterns of participation and achievement for all tertiary learners6” appear clear cut and in marked contrast to the UKs “Talent and hard work alone should determine how far people can go in life, whoever you are, wherever you are from.” (Secretary of State for Education 2017, 6), but it may be reasonable to note that the UK has been working seriously on its widening participation mission for many years, and perhaps has become more openly aware of its limitations and of the political ramifications of its resolve. The UK is also distinctive in having benefited from the same (Conservative) government for more than a decade.

https://www.education.gov.in/en https://www.tec.govt.nz/focus/our-focus/oritetangatertiary-success-for-everyone/ 5  6 

3.5.1 Positive Discrimination Positive discrimination, or affirmative action, as differential encouragement and support, or as financial or economic incentive, have provided the mainstay of governmental and institutional means to effect widening participation. These measures are aimed at supporting students before university age, encouraging students to apply to university and supporting them through the process of application, and supporting them whilst at university. Aotearoa New Zealand has, for example, a range of equity funding measures in place. Currently, equity funding is available to Tertiary Education Organisations to support recruitment and achievement of Māori & Pacific learner, of disabled learners and of learners under 25 with low prior attainment.7 The UK’s long-term financial packages to support widening participation were briefly described in Chap. 2, but a wide range of other measures with financial implications are contributing. For example, Research England and the Office for Students (OfS) recently collaborated to award £eight million research funding for projects to improve access and participation for black, Asian and minority ethnic groups in postgraduate research.8 The situation in India is more complex. Educational reforms envisaged under its New Education Strategy are immense in scope, and certainly involve significant investment commitments to ensure that India’s aspiration for participation is not limited by the distribution of higher education institutions (HEIs)9; 10.8. More HEIs shall be established and developed in underserved regions to ensure full access, equity, and inclusion. (35)

Perhaps the most significant element of affirmative action in the context of participation is the https://www.tec.govt.nz/funding/funding-and-­ performance/funding/fund-finder/equity-funding/ 8  https://www.ukri.org/about-us/research-england/ research-excellence/widening-participation-inpostgraduate-research/ 9  https://www.education.gov.in/en 7 

3.5  How Societies and Universities Are Seeking to Widen Participation in Higher Education

practice of reserving university places for ­minority groups, particularly in highly competitive programmes, and/or lowering the bar for entry for these groups. Such practices exist in India, Brazil, Aotearoa New Zealand, USA, and likely many other nations as well. Most often affirmative action is based on race, ethnicity or caste, in the pursuit of equity, but it is important to note that equity is rarely defined, and in some situations some aspects of equity could be addressed on the basis of socioeconomic status. In Aotearoa New Zealand, Treaty of Waitangi issues are clearly an important rationale for affirmative action.

3.5.2 Addressing the Costs of Widening Participation Cost turns out to be a significant element of attempts by societies to widen access to university. Perhaps over the years universities have found the need to economise as their traditionally upper- and middle-class patrons found other things to do with their money, or had less money to spend on education. Perhaps things got tighter for universities as governments forced them into massification without necessarily increasing funding levels per student. Perhaps neoliberal economic management forced institutions to adapt their processes to become more efficient. And what could be more efficient than only accepting students who have proven themselves capable of succeeding in secondary education systems that have also been short of funding, and so relatively easy to teach. Competing for these students and rejecting others makes business sense in a competitive, ranked system that needs to demonstrate its cost-effectiveness. And putting large numbers of students in one lecture theatre with one lecturer adds another efficiency, made palatable by recruiting the best, most valued academics for the task, itself made possible by the high status of the high-ranking institution. But how much more expensive would it be for a society, committed to widen participation, to change things? Helpfully the costs of, and economies of scale in, supporting students from low-socioeconomic status backgrounds in higher education has

43

recently been researched by Devlin et al. (2022) in Australia. The cost differences, in comparison with more conventional students, were substantial and related to the cost of “increasing aspiration and capital prior to university; academic, personal and financial support provided while studying; establishing, maintaining and appropriately staffing multiple university campuses, particularly in highly disadvantaged areas; and supporting highly complex student needs.” (1). Notably these authors do not necessarily suggest that additional costs are considered as costs … they could, for example, be considered as investments, contributing to transformation of the outcomes of individuals, communities and society. But how much more expensive is it to educate low socio-economic status students then more conventional students? These authors suggest between four and six times, but note that economies of scale are likely. Clearly an academic, rather than political, approach to widen participation in our universities would put more effort into researching these additional costs, or investments, more widely. Australian research is valuable for us but Australia is unlikely to be the same as other countries in these complex matters. Lack of research into the financial implications of many of the commitments made by institutions and governments no doubt contributes to differences between the hopes expressed in policies and strategies and the realities that nations experience. India’s ambitious hopes come with a caveat. 26.2. In order to attain the goal of education with excellence and the corresponding multitude of benefits to this Nation and its economy, this Policy unequivocally endorses and envisions a substantial increase in public investment in education by both the Central government and all State Governments. The Centre and the States will work together to increase the public investment in Education sector to reach 6% of GDP at the earliest. This is considered extremely critical for achieving the high-quality and equitable public education system that is truly needed for India’s future economic, social, cultural, intellectual, and technological progress and growth.10 https://www.education.gov.in/en

10 

44

Without substantially more funding from the Central Government and all State Governments, much within the New Education Policy 2020 may be unobtainable. When governments fail to invest adequately, the expansion in higher education is happening through the entry of private providers who recover the cost of education from students as fees. This obviously leads to an enrolment of only those who can afford to pay the full cost as fees, and students with talent and interest from poorer sections cannot enrol. This can also have a negative impact on the quality of education since the cost of faculty has to be met from student fees and this has an impact on the quantity and quality of faculty. Hence market intervention in the provision of higher education is not compensating adequately for the inadequate growth of public investments for this purpose.

3.5.3 Systemic Changes within Universities It is possible that conventional universities are in the process of change, although readers would have good cause for doubt. One important line of inquiry questions the extent to which current universities are prepared to adequately support the needs of students from disadvantaged backgrounds with a focus on those who already participate either as staff or as students. The research of Dianna Reay, in the UK, is particularly relevant (See for example, Reay 2021, briefly described above). Reay identifies; “subtle processes of exclusion and exclusivity that permeate social life in, particularly, the elite universities. Here, working-class students’ marginalisation in relation to advantageous social activities and networks, compromises their chances of later success in the labour market.” (53) Reay calls into question the culture and ethos of universities, particularly elite universities, with respect to how welcoming they are to ‘outsiders’. Similar doubts are also raised by Dhawan et al. (2022), primarily with respect to university teachers in universities in India, addressed in more detail in our chapter on governance.

3  Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

While Reay’s 2021 article particularly focuses on interactions between working class and middle/upper class students; “Accounting for working-­class students’ experiences in terms of their perceived lack of social and cultural capital only unravels part of the reason for their exclusion. The other part lies in the dynamics of power, prestige and status within the field, and the attitudes and behaviours of the upper- and middle-­ class students.” (61), a great deal of research over many years in the context of the field of enquiry known as ‘education for sustainable development’ has addressed broader implications of university systems that are ‘set in their ways’, with respect to the broad objectives of the sustainability movement (social, environmental and economic sustainability, within which aspirations for social justice is one element). Leadership for change in this context has become an important concept and amongst many calls for change in leadership style and approach, we should highlight one; Turnaround leadership for sustainability in higher education (Scott et al. 2012); Leadership in this area, therefore, goes beyond producing ‘work ready’ graduates or delivering education about sustainability [,] to developing ‘future ready’ graduates using new knowledge and learning experiences that build every graduate’s commitment and ability to engage productively with the unfolding challenges of social, cultural, economic and environmental sustainability in their chosen profession and more broadly. (6).

This particular leadership strategy is remarkable not for its achievements (which by any measure are not particularly notable) but for its openness in seeking not only cognitive, skills-based changes in its graduates, but also overt affective changes relating to what its students will become committed to (essentially to the core values of sustainability). Its strategies are also remarkable with respect to its hopes for university teachers. Areas of recommendation relate in particular to only recruiting university teachers who already demonstrate appropriate commitments, but also to providing incentives to existing teachers to develop such commitments, and only promoting teachers who have these commitments to leadership positions. Unfortunately, institutions and

3.5  How Societies and Universities Are Seeking to Widen Participation in Higher Education

their leaders need to cope with many calls for change that do not necessarily all push, or pull, in the same direction with the same force. It seems, to us, that it is relatively easy to identify the problems inherent to universities that are relevant to the social purposes of these institutions. It appears to be relatively straightforward to identify possible changes within our institutions that might affect these problems, or even solve them. Unfortunately, it also appears to be acceptable for governments and institutions to identify the problem, suggest the solution and to promise change even where reasonable scrutiny of research into higher education policy and practice paints a far more complex picture of higher education structure and functioning.

3.5.4 Rural Under-Developed Areas, Rural Doctors and Teachers, Bonds and Preferential Selection The problems of living and working in rural areas provides a useful example of the dilemmas negotiated by our universities as they attempt to attract participants who will, when they graduate, leave their university city or town to practise their profession in geographically remote areas or in social settings that traditionally have not sent their young people to university. Attracting professional people to remote rural areas has proved particularly problematic for two of our case study nations; India and Aotearoa New Zealand. Governmental policies to address these complex issues certainly involve further development of under-developed areas, but also focus in particular on recruiting and financially supporting students (potential professionals) from the rural areas that it is hoped they will return to. These policies include a range of specific measures to encourage these students to remain in these rural areas after graduation, including guaranteed financially-enhanced employment and housing benefits. See for example; for India; 5.2. To ensure that outstanding students enter the teaching profession - especially from rural areas - a large number of merit-based scholarships shall be

45

instituted across the country for studying quality 4year integrated B.Ed. programmes. In rural areas, special merit-based scholarships will be established that also include preferential employment in their local areas upon successful completion of their B.Ed. programmes. Such scholarships will provide local job opportunities to local students, especially female students, so that these students serve as local-area role models and as highly qualified teachers who speak the local language. Incentives will be provided for teachers to take up teaching jobs in rural areas, especially in areas that are currently facing acute shortage of quality teachers. A key incentive for teaching in rural schools will be the provision of local housing near or on the school premises or increased housing allowances.11

Many universities in India use selection methods for professional programmes, which assess applicants’ abilities or traits which go beyond academic performance (or past educational achievements), although such an assessment procedure is yet to be used widely for liberal education programs or those which deal with social and natural sciences. One relevant challenge is the need to target specific socioeconomic groups of students. Certain kinds of jobs (like becoming a school teacher or education practitioner in a remote part of India) may not be acceptable for a young person who hails from a middle- or upper-­ middle class family in India. Hence certain kinds of jobs with specific social purpose may require matching with the socioeconomic features of students. How this matching is achieved through the admission policies of universities continues to be a major challenge. Azim Premji University provides an example. Though a basic entrance examination is conducted, a large number of students are invited for personal interviews. Such interviews explore the life and educational experience of students to assess their possible orientation to a specific social purpose. Proficiency in English (the medium of higher education in India) is not given a high weighting to ensure that children from schools which use regional languages are not disadvantaged. These students are provided with additional support once they are admitted to the university. A socioeconomic indicator is also used in the ranking of students. For example, a https://www.education.gov.in/en

11 

46

girl student from a tribal community (an underprivileged group in India) with an illiterate mother has a higher weighting than a boy from the mainstream community with an educated mother, under these socioeconomic indicators. Some success is achieved through these admission procedures. For example, the university is able to attract students from poorer and lower middle-class groups. Nearly half of students who pass through its postgraduate programs are willing to take up those jobs that the university aspires to for them, in line with its own social purpose. However, there are some persisting challenges too. Since the university has acquired a certain reputation in India, the students from better-off sections also apply and it is difficult to deny them admission (especially since they may have better scores in qualifying examinations and higher ability in languages, mainly English). When the university has tried to admit more girls as a way to address the problem of gender discrimination that prevails in India, this disproportionately benefits girls from middle-class families, as girls from poorer families often do not complete qualifying education or seek such higher levels of education. Research into why professional people choose not to live in rural areas and what universities might wish to do about it is also a developing area. Research based on a systematic review of international literature relating to high income countries, suggested that concerns over isolation, a poor perception of rural practice and considerations for partners and children, provided the major barrier to recruitment of rural doctors, but that focusing only on rural origin in recruiting for medical school was not necessarily the best way forward (Holloway et al. 2020). These researchers recommended far more focus on developing personal and professional support networks and community integration within the targeted rural areas. (One programme which appears to encapsulate much within this recommendation is worth mentioning. The Monash Rural Medical Programme ‘Monash End-to-End Rural Cohort’ is a graduate entry programme,12 in which much https://www.monash.edu/medicine/rural-health/ monash-ruralregional-md-program/monash-rural-cohort 12 

3  Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

of the medical education is completed in rural places). Holloway et  al. (2020) also called into doubt the efficacy of recruiting international graduates (primarily from low- and medium-­ income countries) specifically for rural areas, and incentivising them staying put with financial bonds. Studies suggest that these professionals experience the same barriers as domestically trained doctors, but to a greater extent. There are also exciting studies on the needs of rural teachers and their preparation, in particular from the USA.  Azano and Stewart (2016) for example, researched the effectiveness of deliberate efforts in a teacher-training program to prepare graduates for rural teaching. These authors make two important recommendations. The first is to provide trainee teachers with meaningful teaching-experiences in rural schools. The word meaningful is important. As suggested by the researchers; “Those practicum experiences must be carefully planned and structured around a framework that attends to the nuances of culture and place.” (119). The second is to focus on “culturally responsive, dialogic pedagogy with an emphasis on place …” (120) to prepare trainees for the circumstances that they will encounter. These authors emphasise the challenges that rural communities face that require such commitment to cultural responsiveness; “Life in many rural communities is influenced by generational poverty, government neglect, and in some cases, overt and oppressive corporate manipulations. While often “unseen” by the general public, rural challenges are issues that affect many.” (120).

3.5.5 Which Students Are Adequately Prepared to Participate in our Universities and What Should Universities Expect of Them? Implicit within previous sections of this chapter is the suggestion that not all potential students are prepared to study at university to the same degree. Prior educational experience is extraordinarily diverse in all three of our case-study nations and, of course, more widely; and although innate ability might also be variable there is no reason to

3.5  How Societies and Universities Are Seeking to Widen Participation in Higher Education

suppose that it dominates preparedness for university study. Democratic perceptions of the roles and responsibilities of universities are generally open to the possibility that everyone is potentially able to benefit from university study. This topic has been an important and challenging theme for the two authors of this book. It may be that the challenges of remote rural-­ life create such educational disadvantages for some potential university students that it is not reasonable to expect them to be able to, or wish to, or reasonably, study conventional curricula extant in conventional universities, either for liberal education courses or for professional programmes. This can be conceptualised as under-preparedness, so needing particular approaches of learning support for those who do participate that are in some sense ‘dumbed down’. On the other hand, and considering, for example, the additional challenges taken on by those from these areas who wish to return to practise professions, such as teaching, such professionals will need particular and highly demanding educational support to do so, not necessarily afforded by conventional curricula or conventional universities. This, contextualised as a possible need for institutions with specific social purposes, is a theme within this book. Changing the delivered objectives of higher education (though not its espoused objectives), the ways that conventional and unconventional universities operate to achieve these, and perhaps the people who they employ, to accommodate, indeed welcome, those with such educational disadvantages, or particular educational needs, may be the way to go, and is also a theme within this book. Importantly these matters have been thought about before. Universities, or colleges, with specific purposes, have existed for a long time. As described in Chap. 2, some of our best, most elite, universities started off with particular purposes, relating to law, theology, or medicine, as examples. Some institutions were established more recently with particular social purposes in mind. Several, including Ruskin College in the UK with a focus on supporting working-class aspirations, have already been described in this book. But many universities have embraced broad adult-education purposes for many years, as Adult Education, Adult and Community

47

Education or in some nations as University Extension. Colleagues in these branches of academic endeavour have thought extensively about their purpose (often in the light of perceived inferiority cast upon them by more conventional academics), about the extent to which they may be obliged or considered to ‘dumbdown’ the academic content of their curricula, and about ways to conceptualise their role in broad democratic, egalitarian contexts. We are particularly struck by the views of Conley (1955) on the roles and responsibilities of universities in the context of adult education. Conley suggests that a university is obliged to understand the needs and interests of its community, the needs of adults (as people similar to but still different from typical undergraduates) and how to teach these adults. Conley goes on to propose that universities should be obliged to provide opportunities for adults to pursue formal education for as long as it proves beneficial to them, no matter if, or why, they were unable to attend initially as school leavers, or if indeed they are returning to higher education to further extend their education. Universities should also attempt to meet vocational and professional needs that are congruent with their broader objectives, such as continuing education within supported professions. Conley goes on to describe obligations to focus on adult education, for example in preparing leaders in adult education, and to research the progress of adult education. Universities must not assume that what works for typical undergraduates will work for adults. It may be inconvenient, or uneconomical, or inefficient in a neoliberal sense, for universities to address the needs of adults, but that is their role. Such obligations are inherent to all educational policies and strategies extant in our case study-nations. How they are enacted is something else (and in particular the topic of our chapter on community engagement). ‘Dumbing down’ may be an issue in higher education nowadays, but to suggest that it is driven by the needs of adults from the communities that universities are there to support is not necessarily the case. Institutional inability or unwillingness to adapt may be a more appropriate descriptor.

48

3.6 Institutions with Special Social Purposes At this stage we do need to focus on how nations have attempted to democratise, or at least increase, participation in universities by establishing some institutions with particular, socially-­oriented aims in mind. For example, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) thrive in the USA today. They were established to provide higher education for African-American communities before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 enabled more equitable participation. Aotearoa New Zealand has established educational institutes, Wānanga, managed by Māori that teach in Te Reo (Māori language) and use traditional Māori principles of education. For a number of years, these institutes have offered a wide range of educational programs including degrees. One such institution, Te Wānanga o Aotearoa, is New Zealand’s secondlargest tertiary institution, with a distributed presence throughout much of the country. Although there have been some concerns about the quality of the education provided by Wānanga, in general they are now accepted as part of the tertiary education landscape in Aotearoa New Zealand. Concerns that Aotearoa New Zealand’s two existing medical schools are not producing doctors willing to work in some of that nation’s poorer and rural areas have initiated exploration of the possibility of developing a new medical school with that specific social purpose and appropriate means to encourage participation. Examples exist around the world, but arguably, we should turn to India with its huge population and overwhelming needs to explore these concepts in detail. Much of the following has been significantly informed by Santhakumar et al. (2020).

3.6.1 Participation Trends in India The demand for inclusion in higher education has manifested in India in multiple forms. Formal higher education was introduced in the country by the colonial rulers. There were two kinds of higher education during the colonial period. First, the one controlled and owned by the colonial

3  Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

state which remained as such even after the country’s independence. The second was controlled and run by the Christian missionaries (with or without financial and other support from the colonial rulers). The cultural and religious ethos of these missionaries was reflected in the colleges run by them. These colleges wanted to retain their specific characteristics even as they continued to receive financial support from post-­ independent governments.

3.6.2 Early Efforts in Colonial India Due to the dominance of English-medium higher education in colonial India, there was a demand for (or attempt to provide) other kinds of higher education in non-English languages and non-­ Christian religious ideologies. We consider a few cases briefly here. The Banaras Hindu University (BHU) was established in 1916 mainly with Indian efforts though supported by English well-­ wishers. The university wanted to focus on science education from the beginning and use English as the medium of instruction. The Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) started in 1875 as a college, through the organic efforts of Indians, but the intention was to provide western and English higher education to Indian Muslims. Its conception was inspired by well-known British universities of Oxford and Cambridge. To a great extent, BHU and AMU can be seen as efforts by local intellectuals to expand conventional higher education to the people they represent. The Jamia Millia Islamia (started initially in Aligarh in the 1920s and later shifted to New Delhi) had a slightly different focus (Pedersen 2016). Its founding vision included a focus on indigenous ethos and a spirit of plurality. There was also a focus on the Urdu language. It was started by Muslim intellectuals who were part of the freedom struggle or nationalist movement in India. It also got support from non-Muslim leaders of the movement, like MK Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, as they thought that the kind of education imparted in Jamia would facilitate harmonious relations between educated Muslims and Hindus in the country.

3.6  Institutions with Special Social Purposes

The Mahatama Gandhi Kashi Vidyapith (in Varanasi) and the Gujarat Vidyapith (in Ahmedabad) founded in the 1920s had a somewhat different orientation. Both these institutes of higher education were inspired by Gandhi’s vision of self-reliance and self-rule. In that sense, these two universities were different in their ideological traditions and linked to the spirit of the resistance to colonial rule and the education promoted by it. In Gandhi’s view too, these institutions were for those who boycotted universities run by the colonial rulers. There was a focus on Hindi, self-reliance (in production processes) and anti-colonialism in the content (Adjei 2007). These universities were outside the public education system and were supported by Indian nationalists and businesses. The post-independent governments accepted these ‘alternative’ universities as national institutes and they came under the University Grants Commission (UGC) and central/state governments in the 1960s. However, there is no evidence to believe that the alternative paradigm pursued in these universities has influenced the country’s higher education, in general, after independence. The Kashi Vidyapith has become an affiliating university, and the colleges affiliated to it pursue, by and large, regular degree programs. The Gujarat Vidyapith continued with certain practices, but one can sense that rather than being able to influence other institutes of higher education, it is increasingly being influenced by the mainstream form of higher education in the country. The mainstream higher education in India continued without much change in terms of content from its colonial form (and with English as the formal medium of instruction), though the ownership, management and academic positions were transferred to Indians.

3.6.3 Demands by Caste Groups Different caste groups are also an important part of Indian society (Ambedkar 1935/2014). There were demands from different castes (especially those historically marginalised in education) to get higher representation in higher education.

49

This demand manifested in two forms. First, getting seats in institutions of higher education reserved for them (Reservation, or Quota). Though there are challenges in seeing that benefits of reservation reach students at large who belong to intended social groups and that higher education is really inclusive for Dalits and such marginalised groups (Kirpal et  al. 1985; Maheshwari 1997; Singh 2013; Wankhede 2013; Malish and Ilavarasan 2016; and Maurya 2018) reservation has enabled the higher education of some people among these groups. Second, there are certain locations (like Kerala) where caste associations started schools and, later, colleges, and most of these sought (and received as part of their political assertion) financial assistance from the state. Though such assistance brings these institutes under government regulation, the management (that is, caste organisation) has certain rights. A majority of the teachers and students in these are from the caste which controls them. However, the caste associations did not demand a different educational content which would reflect their cultural ethos. This could be because these castes were already an integral part of the Hindu society, albeit less privileged and integrated with a certain level of suppression, and they were attempting to follow cultural traits of the upper castes as part of their social mobility. One group which has been, by and large, outside the Hindu mainstream and has pursued a different cultural ethos in India are the tribal people. However, they have not demanded or pursued a different content in higher education (until recently) since they were economically marginalised and have limited political power in most parts of India. Their achievements in terms of even school education were minimal until recently. Their languages were not reflected even in school education in most parts of the country. Though there have been some efforts to get control of and better representation in school education by different sections of the tribal population, these have, so far, not extended to higher education (Xaxa 2008, 2021). There have been efforts to establish tribal colleges and universities (Bull and Guillory 2018) but the courses in most of these places aim at providing conventional edu-

50

3  Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

cation to students from tribal families. Though financing colleges at present provide standard or there are states, such as Mizoram, where the common education (irrespective of their minority tribal population is in majority, so they control status). The less-privileged religious minority in education and their language is well represented India  - Muslims  - faces issues of not enough in school education, there has not been any major inclusion in modern education (Hasan 2012; effort to pursue a different kind of higher Allam 2015), and there is a demand to mitigate education. this situation, but this again is not manifesting in The Constitution of India recognized the need any demand for changing the conventional eduto respect the rights of minorities (whether in cation. All these ensure that though there are terms of language or religion) in educational Indian or alternative imaginations of education institutions. This can be interpreted as (a) the [by Mahatma Gandhi (Adjei 2007), Amdedkar right of minorities to get general education or (b) (Velaskar 2012), Mahatma Phule (Venkatesh the right of minorities to have their own culture 2016)] and calls for the indigenisation of India’s reflected in what they learn in higher education. education (Sundar 2002), the current form of The first part (a) is addressed in the reservation mainstream education is not that different from policy, where places are reserved for minority the colonial one in terms of the content, language groups. Economically disadvantaged minority and cultural ethos. students get the benefit of a quota. Hence the constitutional right of minorities can be seen as something that needs to be aimed primarily at 3.6.4 Teachers as Participants (b). The need to have a higher education that in Institutions with Specific reflects cultural or religious ethos seems to be a Social Purposes genuine one. Though Article 30 of the Indian Constitution recognized minorities in terms of As described above, participation studies have language (Sridhar 1996), not many institutions historically focused on students but increasingly that focus on this have been created. Hence, higher education researchers are exploring how English continues to be the medium of higher underrepresented groups of students go on to education in India (Borooah and Sabharwal become underrepresented groups as faculty. 2017). Not every scheduled or regional language What categories of teachers and researchers, or is a minority language within the region and most faculty, are recruited in a university if it is aiming other (non-scheduled) languages are not given at a specific social purpose? Deciding and ensurimportance even in school education and this has ing that such a university has an appropriate set implications for mother-tongue education of university teachers (faculty) is a major chal(Pattanayak 1981; Annamalai 2001). There are lenge. Different strategies have been tried out in two recent developments with respect to minori- this regard in India and some of these are menties. First, the institutes run by the minorities tioned here. seem to be focusing more on providing general First is the recruitment of both academics and education which need not reflect the cultural/reli- practitioners as faculty. The relative roles of pracgious ethos of the group. There could be a transi- titioners and of professional educators in profestion through which a minority-run institution sional education has been extensively debated becomes a mainstream educational institution in over many years, particularly in the context of terms of content, though the ownership remains individual professions. The extent to which stuwithin the social group. Secondly, the rights of dent doctors, nurses, teachers, engineers are best minorities (under Article 30) becomes a conten- supported by professional educators, generally tious issue as self-financing colleges have who are also professionals in the relevant profesincreased in India, and there is a tendency to use sion, or by practising professionals themselves, is these rights to bypass government regulations far from clear, and indeed different professions regarding fee and admissions. These self-­ have reached different conclusions. Implicit

3.7  How Are We Doing So Far?

within this discourse is the related debate over how best to teach developing professionals; in the university classroom, or in the hospital, or building site? And are professionals best taught how to practise their profession, or taught in the context of lifelong learning, though personal explorations of practice? (See for example in the context of teaching, Oolbekkink-Marchand et al. 2022). In medicine, for example, much teaching of developing professionals is accomplished by practising doctors, often with some concerns expressed on their competence as teachers (Foster and Laurent 2013). In teacher education, much teaching of developing professionals is accomplished by professional teacher educators, often in collaboration with teaching practitioners, who are sometimes not as valued within the academy as the professional teacher educators are! (Professional education worldwide has some odd, even irrational, characteristics). Azim Premji University tried out this strategy. A set of senior faculty who joined the university in its initial stages were practitioners. Since one of the university’s focus areas was school education, those who started alternative schools or those who were running non-governmental organisations in the domain of education were recruited as part of the faculty. Since the university has its own funding sources, and its dependence on governmental agencies is minimal, it has a greater flexibility in deciding the nature of faculty. Such an entry of practitioners has enabled the university and its teaching programs to have a greater orientation to the world of practice. A set of academics who joined as faculty also had different levels of exposure to the practice in the form of association with non-governmental organisations or people’s movements or of experience in consulting. Such use of practitioners is a strategy used by other institutes such as TISS13 or IRMA14 - other institutes with specific social purposes in India. Second, a number of opportunities can be provided to the faculty to develop close collaboration with practitioners in other organisations. This may include provisions or funding to colTata Institute of Social Sciences. Institute of Rural Management Anand.

13  14 

51

laborate with practising organisations or inviting practitioners as visiting/guest/adjunct faculty. These opportunities enhance the exposure of the university academics and students to the social issues which are connected to the social purpose. However, there are challenges which limit the attainment of the full-potential of these strategies. Practitioners, when they become faculty, may lose interest in drawing insights from practice, or they may get attracted to the esoteric but sometimes not-so-grounded theories of our academic world. Though practitioners work along with academics, there may not be enough joint work and collaboration and each set may work in silos. Sometimes the relationship can be adversarial. Academics may think that field practitioners have to be ‘taught’ and this may create a resistance and adversarial attitude on the part of the latter. The practitioners may think that the academics have no grounded understanding and this may prevent them from having any meaningful interaction with the latter. All these may work against the development of an appropriate knowledge-­base that can be used for education which is connected to the social purpose.

3.7 How Are We Doing So Far? We doubt that this question is taken particularly seriously by many in and around higher education, with respect to participation, at present. Higher education is struggling with unanswered philosophical questions and the burden of mission statements, policies and strategies that may be poorly thought through, overly ambitious, or simply mischievous, depending on your point of view, political leaning, or interest in the research underway into the policy and practice of higher education. The question also anticipates further analysis in a later chapter, where we explore governance of higher education and its interest in researching the practices of whatever is being governed. Nevertheless, the question is taken seriously by some, and some research is underway to explore how nation’s attempts to change partici-

3  Participation, Social Mobility and Social Purpose

52

pation in higher education are working. At this stage we mention the research of Baines et  al. (2022) who systematically reviewed the peer-­ reviewed literature that examined how diverse widening participation programmes for UK school children aged 16 and under in the past 20 years might have changed their attitudes and behaviours towards universities in the UK. These researchers highlight bias and lack of clarity in methods in this research, emphasising not only that these are tough objectives but that researching them is also extraordinarily challenging. Even so, researchers were able to identify approaches with potential. As with most developments relating to attitudes, behaviours and affect in general, exposure to suitable role models is important. One other particular analysis is worth mentioning in some detail. Evans et  al. (2019) explored institutional approaches to widening participation in one nation (Wales, part of the UK). The research confirmed a great deal of similarity between different higher education institutions as they addressed issues of access and social inequality. Nevertheless, these authors also identified subtle variations between institutions; The particular configuration of emphasis placed on each distinct approach is not arbitrary. It reflects historic differences between HEIs in their cultures, ethos and student bodies and institutional interests and priorities in relation to their positions within a hierarchically differentiated market-­ driven HE system. (Evans et al. 2019, 12).

This chapter perhaps is best ended with a reiteration of Evans et al.’s “hierarchically differentiated market-driven HE system” as a characterisation of what might limit universities’ achievements of their social purpose internationally via changes in participation.

References Adjei P (2007) Decolonising knowledge production: the pedagogic relevance of Gandhian Satyagraha to schooling and education in Ghana. Can J Educ/ Revue Canadienne De l’éducation 30(4):1046–1067. Retrieved from https://journals.sfu.ca/cje/index.php/ cje-­rce/article/view/2986

Allam M (2015) Indian minorities in higher education. Marghiloman Romania, Buzau Ambedkar BR (1935/2014) Annihilation of caste: the annotated critical edition. Verso Annamalai E (2001) Managing multilingualism in India: political and linguistic manifestations. Sage, New Delhi Azano AP, Stewart TT (2016) Confronting challenges at the intersection of rurality, place and teacher preparation: improving efforts in teacher education to staff rural schools. Glob Educ Rev 3(1):108–128 Baines L, Gooch D, Ng-Knight T (2022) Do widening participation interventions change university attitudes in UK school children? A systematic review of the efficacy of UK programmes, and quality of evaluation evidence. Educ Rev 3:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/0 0131911.2022.2077703 Basken P (2022) Court ‘likely’ to ban affirmative action, Times Higher Education, July 7–20, 9 Baum S, McPherson MS (2022) Can college level the playing field? Higher education in an unequal society. Princeton University Press Borooah VK, Sabharwal NS (2017) “English as a medium of instruction in Indian education: inequality of access to educational opportunities”, CPRHE research papers 10, Centre for Policy Research in higher education. National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi Bull CC, Guillory J (2018) Revolution in higher education: Identity & Cultural Beliefs Inspire Tribal Colleges & universities. Daedalus 147(2):95–105. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48563022 Conley (1955) The Universityns role in adult education. J High Educ 26(1):14–17 Cotton D, Alcock I (2013) Commitment to environmental sustainability in the UK student population. Stud High Educ 38(10):1457–1471. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307 5079.2011.627423 Devlin M, Zhang L-C, Edwards D, Withers G, McMillan J, Vernon L, Trinidad S (2022) The costs of and economies of scale in supporting students from low socioeconomic status backgrounds in Australian higher education. High Educ Res Dev 42:1–16. https://doi. org/10.1080/07294360.2022.2057450 Dhawan NB, Belluigi DZ, Idahosa GE-O (2022) “There is a hell and heaven difference among faculties who are from quota and those who are non-quota”: under the veneer of the “new middle class” production of Indian public universities. High Educ 86:271–296. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10734-­022-­00932-­7 Education and Training Act (2020). https://www. legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2020/0038/latest/ 096be8ed81c582b4.pdf Evans C, Rees G, Taylor C, Wright C (2019) ‘Widening access’ to higher education: the reproduction of university hierarchies through policy enactment. J Educ Policy 34(1):101–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/026809 39.2017.1390165 Foster K, Laurent R (2013) How we make good doctors into good teachers: a short course to support

References busy clinicians to improve their teaching skills. Med Teach 35(1):4–7. https://doi.org/10.3109/01421 59X.2012.731098 Grove J (2011) Widening access: are we imposing middle-­ class values on everyone? Times Higher Education, July 21 Hasan Z (2012) Trapped in an invisible present: Muslims and disparities in higher education. In: Zoya H, Martha CN (eds) Equalizing access. New Delhi, Oxford, pp 239–255 Holloway P, Bain-Donohue S, Moore M (2020) Why do doctors work in rural areas in high-income countries? A qualitative systematic review of recruitment and retention. Aust J Rural Health 28(6):543–554. https:// doi.org/10.1111/ajr.12675 Kernohan D (2022) HESA data spring 2022: widening participation performance indicators https:// wonkhe.com/blogs/hesa-­data-­spring-­2022-­widening-­ participation-­performance-­indicators/ Kirpal V et al (1985) Scheduled caste and tribe students in higher education: a study of an IIT. Econ Polit Wkly 20(29):1238–1248 Maheshwari SR (1997) Reservation policy in India: theory and practice. Indian J Public Adm 43(3):662–679 Malish CM, Ilavarasan PV (2016) Higher education, reservation and scheduled castes: exploring institutional habitus of professional engineering colleges in Kerala. High Educ 72(5):603–617 Maurya RK (2018) In their own voices: experiences of Dalit students in higher education institutions. Int J Multicult Educ 20(3):17–33 Oolbekkink-Marchand H, Oosterheert I, Scholte Lubberink L, Denessen E (2022) The position of student teacher practitioner research in teacher education: teacher educators’ perspectives. Educ Action Res 30(3):445–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.202 0.1857811 Pattanayak DP (1981) Multilingualism and mother-­ tongue education. Oxford University Press, New Delhi Pedersen GH (2016) The role of Islam in Muslim higher education in India: the case of Jamia Millia Islamia in New Delhi. Rev Middle East Stud 50(1):28–37. http:// www.jstor.org/stable/26250536 Reay D (2021) The working classes and higher education: meritocratic fallacies of upward mobility in the United Kingdom. Eur J Educ 56(1):53–64. https://doi. org/10.1111/ejed.12438 Santhakumar V, Dietz G, Castillo Guzman E, Shephard K (2020) Indigenization of higher education: Trends in India, Latin America and New Zealand https:// practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ indigenization-­of-­higher-­education-­trends-­in-­india-­ latin-­america-­and-­new-­zealand/

53 Scott R (2022) Does university make you more liberal? Estimating the within-individual effects of higher education on political values. Elect Stud 77:102471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2022.102471 Scott G, Tilbury D, Sharp L, Deane E (2012) Turnaround leadership for sustainability in higher education: Final report 2012. http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/ assets/pdf_file/0018/411075/TLSHE_Final_Exec_ Summary_HA_12_Nov_12_pdf_version.pdf Secretary of State for Education (2017) Unlocking Talent, Fulfilling Potential: A plan for improving social mobility through education https://assets.publishing. service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/ attachment_data/file/667690/Social_Mobility_ Action_Plan_-­_for_printing.pdf Sheeran Y, Brown BJ, Baker S (2007) Conflicting philosophies of inclusion: the contestation of knowledge in widening participation. Lond Rev Educ 5. https:// doi.org/10.1080/14748460701661302 Shephard K (2016) Discovering tertiary education through others’ eyes and words: exploring submissions to New Zealand’s review of its tertiary education sector. J High Educ Policy Manag 39:1–16. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/1360080X.2016.1254430 Singh AK (2013) Defying the odds: the triumphs and tragedies of Dalit and Adivasi students in higher education. In: Deshpande S, Zacharias U (eds) Beyond inclusion: the practice of equal access in Indian higher education. Routledge, New Delhi, pp 205–221 Sridhar KK (1996) Language in education: minorities and multilingualism in India. Int Rev Educ 42(4):327–347. Springer Sundar N (2002) Indigenise, nationalize, and spiritualize­an agenda for education. Int Soc Sci J 54:373–383. Blackwell Publishers, Malden UNESCO (1995) Policy paper for change and development in higher education. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ ark:/48223/pf0000098992 Velaskar P (2012) Education for liberation: Ambedkar’s thought and dalit women’s perspectives. Contemp Educ Dialog 9(2):245–271 Venkatesh K (2016) Education for liberation: exploring Mahatma Phule’s work in education. Contemp Educ Dialog 13(1):121–144 Wankhede GG (2013) Caste and social discrimination: nature, forms and consequences in education. In: Nambisan GB, Srinivasa Rao S (eds) Sociology of education in India: changing contours and emerging concerns. OUP, New Delhi, pp 182–198 Xaxa V (2008) State, society, and tribes: issues in post-­ colonial India. Pearson, New Delhi Xaxa V (2021) Tribes and higher education in India. In: The Routledge handbook of education in India. Routledge

4

Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

4.1 Introduction Previous chapters have analysed trends in traditional universities to suggest that the functions of these institutions have primarily addressed the needs and aspirations of the wealthier members of societies rather than everyone in society. Indeed, it has been argued that universities’ structure and ways of working maintain this hegemonic separation. Although social purposes for universities are widely espoused it is sometimes challenging to identify these purposes as inherent to universities’ structure and functioning. This chapter focuses on social purposes that are already or may be enabled by universities’ teaching functions and addresses change that may occur because some of the students who we teach lead the change or are directly involved in it, as well as change that may occur because all of the students who we teach accept the need for change at a societal or population level. Other chapters address research and community engagement as contributing to social purposes. Universities’ roles that include teaching in the context of university extension and adult education are also primarily addressed in our chapter on community engagement. These chapters also include commentary on the possible need to develop novel universities with specific social purposes to address the problems that conventional universities have in these regards.

4.2 What Kinds of Teaching Would Be Useful for Specific Social Purposes: Historical and Current Educational Research and Development on Teaching for Social Justice Recent history emphasises many attempts to change the practices of universities in ways that would address their social purposes. In the late twentieth century notions of ‘graduateness’ crept into learning and teaching discourses, certainly in the UK, Australia and in New Zealand (see for example, Barrie 2012). Societal calls to identify the benefits of 3 or 4 years of immersion in the knowledge base of particular disciplines led to many institutions creating lists of graduate attributes [skills, attitudes and dispositions necessarily held by graduates but not necessarily by nongraduates, many with links to higher education’s social purpose, such as global citizenship and social responsibility (Brown et  al. 2019)]. Many readers of this book will remember attempts to codify academic skills, key skills and transferable skills within higher education curricula. A broadly equivalent development, notably championed by universities and colleges in the USA, promoted civics education1.

See for example https://research4sc.org/history-of-­ civics-­education-in-the-united-states/ with respect to civics education for social change. 1 

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_4

55

4  Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

56 Educating students to be socially responsible, informed, and engaged citizens in their workplaces, nation, and the global community should be an expected goal for every major. Achieving this goal will require that departments, programs, and disciplines define the public purposes of their respective fields, the civic inquiries most urgent to explore, and the best way to infuse civic learning outcomes.2

India’s succession of national education strategies created similar calls for universities to benefit society, and not only graduates, to convey similar hopes. At an international level, international agreements calling initially for higher education to contribute to ‘environmental education’ and then to ‘education for sustainability’ and more recently to ‘education for sustainable development’ and the achievement of the sustainable development goals has continued, and to a degree integrated, societal expectations for universities to have a social purpose. These notions are, perhaps, best explored nowadays in the context of the sustainable development goals. At the time of writing, we have fewer than 8 years to achieve their agreed targets. Universities are, of course, specifically noted in SDG#4 (Education) but expectations of contribution via teaching and learning are implicit within all of the goals and many of the targets, be they focused on social justice or environmental justice. Soon after the SDGs were agreed in 2015, universities around the world pledged their support for their achievement. The University of Otago, in New Zealand, is typical of many; “University of Otago was the first New Zealand university to sign the international SDG Accord, and is actively contributing to these goals through its research, teaching and operations.”3 To support these numerous international pledges, academic representatives of universities from around the world developed tools to assist university teachers (and teachers at other educational levels) to develop learning https://www.aacu.org/office-of-global-citizenship-for-­­ campus-community-and-careers/civic-promptscivic-learning-in-the-major-by-design 3  https://www.otago.ac.nz/sustainability/doing/sdg/index. html 2 

objectives and teaching activities for each of the SDGs that could be integrated within almost every conceivable discipline.4 It is almost impossible to imagine a university course that has no bearing whatsoever on the SDGs. This international movement has been further promoted by linking its achievements to the almost ubiquitous university ranking competition, where universities submit themselves to highly quantitative analyses of their performance. The Times Higher Education (THE) Impact Rankings5 is somewhat different from others in that it focuses on the SDGs, rather than on other more traditional measurables such as research reputation and teaching quality. The Times Higher Education Impact Rankings are the only global performance tables that assess universities against the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We use carefully calibrated indicators to provide comprehensive and balanced comparison across four broad areas: research, stewardship, outreach and teaching. (np).

Few would doubt the power of competition to drive institutional behaviour. Notably, however, the impact rankings address far more than teaching, and arguably have problems addressing learning rather than teaching. Each year the THE Impact Rankings methodology statement reports that it asks institutions whether they have a commitment to ‘meaningful education’ around the SDGs in some or all programmes. In some respects, this chapter is about ‘meaningful education’ in the context of the SDGs, and universities’ attempts to produce this. Such analyses enable some important distinctions and categorisations inherent to the issues of social purpose and the meaning of ‘meaningful education’. Might it be possible, for example, for universities to address their social purposes entirely through their support of individual disciplines? Some disciplines are, of course, about social purpose and social justice. Sociology and social work have well established positions in universities nowadays. Nursing and medicine could similarly be described as having social purhttps://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444 https://www.timeshighereducation.com/impactrankings

4  5 

4.2  What Kinds of Teaching Would Be Useful for Specific Social Purposes: Historical and Current…

pose. Of course, students in these departments are taught about the social-justice-focussed SDGs! Such issues are naturally part of these disciplines’ curricula. Environmental science and marine biology are similarly well-respected disciplines, and many students enrol in these programmes. These disciplines have direct relevance to the environmentally focussed SDGs. Students studying marine science will have much to say about SDG# 14 (Life below water) but perhaps will be less prepared to consider the tasks inherent to SDG #1 (No poverty). Is it enough that all students learn something of relevance to the SDG’s related to their chosen discipline, or is there a need for all students to learn something about all of the SDGs, irrespective of their chosen discipline? What exactly have institutions pledged themselves to do, in the context of their teaching, other than what they were already doing? Is this honest confusion, a particular sleight of hand, or simply what universities nowadays find acceptable? This chapter needs to assess the situation and argue a perspective. And what should be taught in these disciplines, for universities to be reasonably addressing their social purposes? It should be clear that university advocates for environmental and social justice have argued about this for many decades. Early environmental-education educators certainly reasoned the need to maintain traditional university liberal values, taught essentially about the environment, and trusted that learners would take their new knowledge to change the ways that societies interacted with and within nature. Only in the last few decades of the twentieth Century, with the developing schism between sustainability and sustainable development (the schism focused on doubts that our shared environment could cope with any more human development) did it become apparent to many that our education needed to be not only about environmental and social justice but for environmental and social justice. Clarity in meaning was hard to find in these early stages but in essence many agreed that Bloom’s taxonomies of cognitive and affective learning (Krathwohl et al. 1988) were helpful; cognitive learning providing knowledge and skills, affective learning addressing what values,

57

attitudes and dispositions our learners might learn and use to influence what they might choose to do with their new-found knowledge and skills (Shephard 2008). Many in the developing field of enquiry known as Education for Sustainable Development have converged on ‘competence’ as the core elements of meaningful learning. One highly cited definition of competency, in the context of sustainable development has been provided by Brundiers et al. (2020).6 Competency; Cluster of specific and interrelated individual dispositions comprising knowledge, skills, motives, and attitudes, i.e., combining cognitive, affective, volitional and motivational elements. Competency facilitates self-organized action, a pre-condition to achieve successful performance and a positive outcome in various complex situations, responding to the specific situation and context (np).

It is important to note that this definition provides a clear commentary on how ‘competent people’ should perform (so is essentially normative in its aspirations for behavioural change) and achieves this by integrating cognition (as knowledge and skills, or what people are able to do) and affect (as attitudes and dispositions, contributing to what people are willing to do). No wonder this is education for sustainable development, not about sustainable development. Perhaps this is what THE calls ‘meaningful education’, although it is notable that very little research internationally confirms how successful such education may be, or provides useful educational pathways to achieving these outcomes in situations where students have not already committed themselves to learning for sustainability. Where concerted efforts have been made to research the impacts of sustainability-oriented education on student and graduate behaviours, reports certainly do emphasise the challenges that we face. For example, the University of Michigan is an institution with a renowned sustainability focus. Using both quantitative and qualitative research approaches directed at student learning, this research found;

Competences, competency and competencies are widely used in this discourse. 6 

4  Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

58 … no evidence that, as students move through [the University], they became more concerned about various aspects of sustainability or more committed to acting in environmentally responsible ways, either in the present moment or in their adult lives. (Schoolman et al. 2016, 498).

Implicit within this discourse is another schism, between those who think of education as emancipatory, in enabling individuals to make their own decisions about their place in the world, or as instrumental, in leading people to make the ‘correct’ or normative decisions. It is difficult to imagine any ‘education’ that is for anything in particular [other than, perhaps, to be for critical thinking, (Shephard and Egan 2018), or for intellectual independence, (Shephard 2020)] to be other than instrumental. A related schism exists in another discipline of relevance to education and to education for sustainability, development, or development studies. Development academics compare essentialist and anti-essentialist paradigms (see for example, Chankseliani et  al. 2021). Essentialism asserts the need to plan for particular aspects of development and finds clear cut roles for universities to be for the modernisation of societies. Anti-essentialist approaches to development emphasise diverse links between higher education and development and allow for the possibility of institutions emphasising personal freedoms, such as the intellectual independence of students and graduates. Such variations make it challenging for us to agree on what ‘meaningful education’ means in the context of universities’ social purposes. Also relevant to discourse on the nature of teaching and learning in the context of social purpose is recent social science research on privilege. It is a long-standing observation that some students from highly privileged backgrounds develop a strong orientation to social justice and social responsibility, particularly whilst at university and involved in some form of service learning. Recent research by Howard has attempted to contribute to our understanding of why this might be and how it might have been induced. Qualitative research identified three main sources of motivation for such student’s participation in social justice efforts: responding

to guilt; understanding themselves as a resource for change; and being rewarded for their social justice efforts (Howard 2013). If higher education institutions do intend to teach young people to orientate towards social justice, the motivations that drive the most privileged to do so may provide interesting objectives to explore.

4.3 What ‘Meaningful Education’ Means in the Context of Universities’ Social Purposes Matters related to intellectual independence, emancipatory ESD and anti-essentialist development will be addressed in a later chapter in this book. The following sections primarily address universities’ teaching and learning in the context of ‘essentialist development’ and ‘instrumental ESD’, but also attempts to unravel the complexity inherent even to these sub-divisions. Many universities around the world (perhaps particularly the USA’s Land Grant Universities and the UK’s Redbrick Universities), were established with social needs, change and development in mind, often in local contexts. The nature of scholarship in these contexts was extensively explored in the 1990s by Boyer [see for example, Boyer 1996 with strong links to the nature of teaching best able to support university functions in these contexts]. The Scholarship of Learning and Teaching (SOTL) has evolved into a substantial discourse on the nature of teaching and its development. The Scholarship of Engagement is directly related to how universities engage with local communities. Both scholarships have much to do with universities’ social purposes and how teaching is imagined to be for these purposes. University Extension, sometimes referred to as Adult and Community Education (ACE) or Continuing Education, has also been highly instrumental in supporting community development, and generally operates at tertiary (post-­ compulsory) education levels, although often below degree level. The University of Cambridge, in the UK, effectively initiated university extension internationally in the late

4.3  What ‘Meaningful Education’ Means in the Context of Universities’ Social Purposes

1800s (see Lawrie 2014, for a historical account), partly in response to growing concerns for educational opportunities for women. Where such courses fit higher education, how they are taught, what educational objectives they have in mind, and whether or not such courses are appropriate to be taught at university level has been a contested issue in many countries, but the basic premise of ACE, and its fit to higher education, were substantially prescribed by Conley (1955) and included in our chapter on participation. There are many opportunities for mismatches of purpose, roles, funding, functions, provision and contestation in this broad area. In New Zealand, for example, ‘community education’ is a legislated role for its universities, but specific funding for this purpose is not necessarily provided. Aspects of relevant discourses are also provided in our chapter on community engagement. Both authors of this book are unashamed supporters of ACE as an important role for all universities, but perhaps particularly so for universities that accept specific social purposes. So, either as undergraduate teaching, or as university extension, what forms of teaching might be necessary to encourage students and graduates, through their behaviour, to help universities achieve social purposes such as reducing poverty, limiting greenhouse gas emission, maintaining biodiversity, gender equality and reducing geographical differences in development? To make the analysis simpler, for the purposes of this chapter, we should imagine that some disciplines will be doing some of this teaching in some ways already, but that all disciplines and all students will need to change if we are to achieve our social purposes on population scales. Gender equality, for example, cannot be a disciplinary preference. And we need to be committed to the prospect that this is to be teaching for these things, not simply about these things. Universities around the world are exploring these questions, some more systematically than others. There are, no doubt, many ways to slice this cake, but our approach in this book is to be systematic with respect to the nature of the perceived mission, or needs of the particular stu-

59

dents involved. We identify three broad categories of students. Category A students: Some students enrol in degree programmes that have environmental or social justice at their heart. They may have titles such as ‘Environmental Management’ or ‘Development Studies’. Most likely these students are already committed to the principles of justice that their universities have pledged allegiance to. They will require little by way of tuition in civics or social responsibility. They are destined to be change agents themselves; environmental lawyers, environmental or sustainability managers, social justice advocates, or human-development practitioners. Although traditional degree programmes may not have been a good fit for them, nowadays, disciplines, departments and programmes are adapting to the need to be multi- and interdisciplinary. And new degree programmes appear regularly for them, and these students fit within them very well. Universities may pride themselves on the specific social purposes that they are achieving with these programmes, but to be honest, these are not necessarily the challenging specific social purposes that this book is most interested in. For us this is simply disciplinary teaching and learning, adapting and working well with students well-matched to a programme designed for a specific purpose. Category B students: Many students, in conventional universities in both developed and less well-developed countries, enrol in degree programmes that probably do not have environmental justice or social justice at their heart. The programmes may be Physics, Classics, French Literature or Management Studies. But somehow, these students now need to learn to be good global citizens as well, to understand and empathise with the plight of minority students, with marginalised sectors of the community that has sponsored the University, with disadvantaged people around the world, and at least acknowledge their own part in environmental degradation globally. They will be expected to acquire sustainability literacy, at the very least, and often more in accordance with what their university has promised their society on their behalf. Much in these categories is likely to involve teaching

60

and learning in the affective domain for values, dispositions and subsequent behaviours. Much in this space has the adjective transformational in front. How on earth can traditional universities possibly address such an awesome challenge? Category A obligations appear like a walk in the park in comparison with the challenges inherent to Category B. Category C students: Some students may collectively be categorised as less advantaged than A and B.  Perhaps they have grown up in low socioeconomic households or regions. Perhaps their first language is not the same as that predominantly used at university. Perhaps, even likely, they are first-generation students. There may be cultural or ethnic differences between these students and the mainstream others. Universities may need to design particular curricula for these students, often starting at academic levels below that which might be helpful for other students, but often also broader, as in multidisciplinary, or focused on particular cultural traditions. The focus of such programmes may indeed be on learning, but often in the context of broader objectives, such as contributing to the economic development of particular groups of people, or particular areas. Paradoxically, although the teaching and learning in this category may have more breadth and less depth than traditionally encountered in conventional university settings, much of the teaching in the context of sustainability is likely to be cognitive rather than affective. In general, these students do not need to be persuaded to change their values, particularly not with respect to social justice, unless their own cultural traditions are out of alignment with the sustainable development goals. Perhaps they need to be educated to learn about the values of the strange academic world that they chose to inhabit, but certainly not to change what makes them who and what they are. They are in essence the recipients of social injustice, not its cause or its beneficiaries. Working with Category C students may be hard work for everyone involved, but pedagogically many in higher education are in familiar terrain.

4  Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

4.4 Some Examples of Teaching and Learning Programmes that Address Specific Social Purposes 4.4.1 Conventional Universities and Category B Students Institutions and their teachers need not imagine that their teaching path towards the SDGs and their social purpose is a lonely one. Many authorities have invested substantially in building resources that will support those who wish to use their teaching to contribute to social change. For most universities in the world, most of our students are in Category B. The European Union (EU) is particularly active in this regard and has held a longstanding position on social justice, the responsibilities of EU Citizens and the roles of higher education; … higher education institutions are the focal points for imparting what is known, interrogating what is not, producing new knowledge, shaping critical thinkers, problem solvers and doers so that we have the intellectual muscle needed to tackle societal challenges at every level necessary and advance European civilisation. (European Commission 2013)

Towards the creation of ‘Doers’, the EU sponsored, for example, ‘The Rounder Sense of Purpose’ project7 designed to support teachers at all levels who wish to ‘educate for sustainable development’. The resource imagines 12 competencies that might support sustainability and links these to possible teaching and learning activities that could promote them and contribute to the 17 SDG’s. Online reports suggest that this particular resource is widely used within Europe, but not necessarily with evaluated outcomes. On a similar mission, in 2016/17 many ‘Education for sustainable development (ESD) researchers’ helped UNESCO to formulate a set of ‘learning objectives for the SDGs’.8 UNESCO’s resource describes what learning universities and their teachers might aim for in https://aroundersenseofpurpose.eu https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444

7  8 

4.4  Some Examples of Teaching and Learning Programmes that Address Specific Social Purposes

detail, helps teachers to link these to appropriate teaching and learning activities and, in a more limited way, how learning achievements may be assessed. This resource is particularly helpful for the purposes of this chapter, in the context in particular of Category B students and situations, as it fully accepts the challenges of teaching and learning in three domains: The cognitive domain comprises knowledge and thinking skills necessary to better understand the SDG and the challenges in achieving it. The socio-emotional domain includes social skills that enable learners to collaborate, negotiate and communicate to promote the SDGs as well as self-­ reflection skills, values, attitudes and motivations that enable learners to develop themselves. The behavioural domain describes action competencies (what we are able and willing to perform). (UNESCO 2017, 5).

We should note, in particular, that our students in this category, once successfully educated, will be willing to perform prescribed competencies such as; “Anticipatory competency: the abilities to understand and evaluate multiple futures  – possible, probable and desirable; to create one’s own visions for the future; to apply the precautionary principle; to assess the consequences of actions; and to deal with risks and changes.” and “Normative competency: the abilities to understand and reflect on the norms and values that underlie one’s actions; and to negotiate sustainability values, principles, goals, and targets, in a context of conflicts of interests and trade-offs, uncertain knowledge and contradictions.” (UNESCO 2017, Box 1.1).

Notably this UNESCO resource emphasises that; Competencies cannot be taught, but have to be developed by the learners themselves. They are acquired during action, on the basis of experience and reflection. (UNESCO 2017, 10).

Even so, its authors do describe the kinds of teaching and learning activities (TLAs) that they consider might be helpful as students do learn to be competent in these ways. These include: Collaborative real-world projects, such as service-­ learning projects and campaigns for different SDGs; Vision-building exercises such as future

61

workshops, scenario analyses, utopian/dystopian story-telling, science- fiction thinking, and forecasting and backcasting; Analyses of complex systems through community-based research projects, case studies, stakeholder analysis, actors’ analysis, modelling, systems games, etc; Critical and reflective thinking through fish-bowl discussions, reflective journals, etc. (UNESCO 2017, Box 2.2.4).

Notably, although some of these TLAs are common in conventional university settings, some are less so. Most are difficult to achieve without reasonable staff/student ratios. The challenges for higher education institutions are not hidden in this resource. This resource is also honest with its readers about its expectations relating to assessment, evaluation and monitoring; Monitoring and evaluation must be improved to secure the evidence for continued and expanded investment in ESD, and for reflexive engagement with ESD as an emerging educational reorientation process. The development of indicator frameworks that establish standards for ESD learning outcomes is therefore critical. (UNESCO 2017, 57).

This is an impressive resource, emphasising some impressive challenges for higher education. On balance it confirms that social justice objectives for Category B students are very different from what most students think they have come to university for, that the TLAs that might realistically be necessary to achieve these learning objectives are likely unrealistic for institutions that have historically simply lectured to their students, and that assessment and evaluation processes that might be necessary to monitor our progress are not yet in place. To say that in considering UNESCO’s aspirations and approaches we are in contested pedagogical territory would be a great understatement! Aspects of these discourses are deeply appreciated by some ESD advocates, by some within the new discipline of sustainability science, and by many who appreciate the urgency of the SGDs and the compromises that have been reached in agreeing them. Against that, many in more traditional branches of the disciplines of education, sociology, psychology and economics are variously bewildered or antagonised by what they might identify as

4  Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

62

inept and misleading scholarship. In relation to socio-emotional learning, for example, Bryan (2022) questions the appropriateness of higher education seeking socio-emotional learning: Framing ESD/GCED themes in terms of dispositions or competencies operationalises these otherwise contested, complex and contextualised constructs – as a tangible, standardised, comparable, and above all measurable skillset, in line with mandatory reporting requirements on progress towards the achievement of SDG 4.7… (Bryan 2022, np).

And Williamson questions the rationales and motives of those who target such educational objectives. It is increasingly assumed that many students will not engage sufficiently with academic demands out of rational decision-making about their long-­ term best interests, but are understood to be behaviourally shaped by emotions, habits and other non-cognitive processes (Lavecchia, Liu, and Oreopoulos 2014). Consequently, the psychoemotional aspects of education are being targeted by emerging education policies in OECD countries especially … (Williamson 2021, 135).

The bottom line may well be a deeply contested understanding about what higher education is for, and what it most particularly is not for. Perhaps we should return to Category B students and conventional university situations in a few years’ time, to see if anything has changed by then? In the meantime, institutions around the world are making attempts to at least approach UNESCO’s aspirations. Many universities, for example, have joined the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) and use AASHE’s Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System (STARS) to report their progress. STARS encourages participating institutions to measure, monitor, assess, evaluate or otherwise research student learning in the context of sustainability and many do. It is difficult to know how to interpret such data. On the one hand, with so much learning going on, by so many students, in so many institutions, how can it be that we are as close to 2030 as we are, with so little progress made towards the SDGs? On the other hand, this progress is not necessarily what STARS was

designed to achieve. It was designed, essentially, to enable individual institutions to benchmark their own progress against others.

4.4.2 What Institutions with Specific Social Purposes Are Attempting Next, we should turn to institutions that have overtly accepted specific social purposes for a description of more than what might be possible, initially with two examples for Category A students, and after that, with examples for the far more straight-forward (pedagogically speaking) Category C students. We focus here on universities with specific social purposes in India. Category B students are also considered. It should be noted at this stage that recruiting students with particular past experiences and dispositions is also an important strategy of Azim Premji University, described in our chapter on Participation. Some of what is described below becomes possible because particular students are selected for particular educational approaches.

4.4.3 Category A: Teaching Disciplines to Understand the Real Life of Students Though the teaching of academic disciplines is expected to enable students to understand real-­ life contexts and to apply the knowledge in new contexts, this is always challenging, perhaps especially in conventional universities in India. However, such a connection with real life is very important for universities with specific social purposes. We mention two such cases from the Azim Premji University here. Reflective practitioners in the domain of human development need to have an exposure to economics. (People with different disciplinary backgrounds may become such practitioners). However, they may not be able to have a full-­ fledged training in economics (since they have to get exposure to other disciplines like sociology and politics). Even if they have education in

4.4  Some Examples of Teaching and Learning Programmes that Address Specific Social Purposes

e­conomics, it may not be focussed on those aspects which may help them to be development practitioners in developing countries. Practice may not be part of the conventional training in economics (or the kind of practice could be limited to data analysis or research). Hence there is a need to put together the knowledge of economics that is needed and that can be used by development practitioners. This was attempted through the creation of a book of learning materials called ‘Economics in Action9’ at the Azim Premji University. Such a material can be used not only by students of the university but also by others (especially by those who work as development practitioners). However, all such practitioners may not be proficient in English language, and hence this learning material is translated and published in two regional languages10 of India. The translation of learning materials into regional languages is to be an important task if universities want to address specific social needs of poorer and other sections of society. There is a large-scale attempt to translate learning materials in the domain of education and human development into Indian languages at the Azim Premji University.11 There is also an attempt to connect one sub-­ discipline of economics – that is microeconomics  – with the real life of students. Usually, microeconomics uses mathematics to analyse human choices. Given the assumption of rationality in human behaviour in economics (which may seem not so realistic but is useful for analytic and predictive purposes) and the use of mathematics, many teachers of microeconomics focus on abstract models and depend on text-­ books in class-room instructions. This is much more so in developing countries where texts-­ books of the developed world are used. These text-books have not made enough effort to use microeconomics to analyse local problems of the developing world. This limits the usefulness of It is published by Sage and is available to others who are not part of the university. 10  These are Hindi and Marathi. 11  https://azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/translationsinitiative 9 

63

microeconomics. Many students may study the subject to pass examinations, but some may follow these concepts without much reflection based on local realities, as a way to acquire training to be global researchers. Neither of these is useful for those people who may not become economists or who take up normal careers in developing countries. Hence there is a need to connect the teaching of microeconomics with the real life of students in countries like India. This is attempted by developing a large number of examples which can connect the concepts of microeconomics with the real life of students from different parts of India (and similar countries). Some students may come from agricultural families, some may come from areas where there is little industrialisation, and there can be others from urban backgrounds. These different contexts are taken into account in developing examples. In order to facilitate the learning of subjects in a structured manner, examples are developed to cover each and every part of the sub-discipline and also in a sequential manner.12

4.4.4 Category A and B Students: Testing the Ability to Apply the Knowledge School teachers do not necessarily enter the profession with clear values-based enthusiasm for social and environmental justice. There were attempts to orient college teachers to the development and use of examples that seek to connect disciplines with the real life of students. Around 500 college teachers have attended such training programs in two states of India and also Bhutan. These teachers were encouraged to develop similar examples, which after review, were published in the website mentioned earlier. A significant share of teachers who attended these orientation programs developed such examples. They all agreed the need to change the way of teaching microeconomics. They all feel that the majority

These examples are made freely available through reallifemicroeconomics.wordpress.com 12 

64

of students may not gain much from the current way of teaching the subject. Though these efforts could provide an exposure to hundreds of college teachers, how far it has made a real change in the class-room instruction is not clear. One reason could be the absence of a systematic plan to make a change in the assessment pattern in higher education. However, our impression is that there are different barriers against such a transformation in class-room instruction and some of these are mentioned in a subsequent section in this book. Such a transformation requires a higher level of preparedness and effort on the part of college/university teachers. Many may not have this preparedness and the incentives which are available in the existing education system to acquire such a preparedness are also limited. Teachers are also the products of past education practices and the limitations in this regard would affect their preparedness too. The lack of openness may constrain their ability to learn newer practices. In common with most university programmes, and particularly with professional programmes, students do not only learn knowledge, they are expected to learn higher- order cognitive outcomes such as analysis, application and evaluation and be assessed on these abilities (Bloom et  al. 1971). Some programmes, again particularly professional programmes, seek to assess, or evaluate, the degree to which learners accommodate to professional values, attitudes and behaviours, substantially mediated by learning in the affective domain (Krathwohl et al. 1988). Biggs and Tang (2011) distinguished between declarative and functioning knowledge in these regards and emphasised the different pedagogical approaches relevant to each. Assessments of students’ academic achievement that is attempted in Azim Premji University include those which test not only the assimilation of knowledge but also the ability to apply the knowledge and to act based on the understanding of specific social problems. Many courses have a component of evaluation which aims at the application of knowledge in a new social context. For example, the course on ‘political economy, development and governance’ which discusses the possible political transition in different societies and its

4  Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

impact on human development and governance, has an assessment plan that requires each student to think about the political equilibrium of a context of his/her own choice, and explain the process of transition. They may use the core framework that is used in the course or alternative frameworks that they are exposed to through a diversity of readings. However, this evaluation component compels them to think about applying knowledge in contexts which are not discussed in the course. The evaluation of the course called ‘social and economic analysis of development interventions’, requires each student to work on a real or hypothetical intervention. They are expected to analyse the intervention based on the insights from the course. Each module of the course is connected to a part of a life-cycle of intervention and the analysis based on each module is completed as and when the module is over. The evaluation of the course is fully based on its practical use in the specific intervention that is selected by the student (based on his/her own choice). The course on ‘Education and Development: Interlinkages’ which is offered to both education and development students tried out different evaluation mechanisms. The course discusses in detail how the family and social conditions affect not only the access but also the learning achievements of school students who come from poorer and marginalised or vulnerable communities. Though the class-room sessions use a number of case studies, and students may see the connection (theoretically or in terms of aggregate data), they may not ‘feel’ the connection. Of course, some students who come to the university may have themselves faced challenges in their education due to family and socioeconomic conditions. One way to understand this connection for such students is to write a reflective note on their own experience, and that is attempted in the course. In addition, all students are provided opportunities to interact with children in schools which serve poorer and marginalised communities. The university students are asked to write case studies on specific children in these schools regarding the connection between socioeconomic conditions and schooling.

4.4  Some Examples of Teaching and Learning Programmes that Address Specific Social Purposes

This case study and interaction with one or more children who come from poorer backgrounds would give an opportunity to university students to have a grounded understanding of the issue. It may also serve as a motivation to address the challenges which are faced by such children. Thinking about (and carrying out, if possible) an intervention to address such challenges is the next part of the evaluation. Through this, university students are encouraged to ‘respond’ to the situation in ways that they may consider fit. Some may try to address the problem of the specific child that they have studied. In one such case, the student sought out and worked with government functionaries to address the problems that her ‘case child’ faced with respect to schooling. Some others may design a campaign, when they realise that girl children face gender discrimination leading to dropping out from schools. A few others may provide additional learning support to those children who come from poorer families. There are students who may think through a large-scale project to address the specific problem that they have seen (and such a project can be taken up by governmental or non-governmental organisations). These interventions (actual or hypothetical) are evaluated by experienced practitioners based on a variety of factors like relevance, feasibility, the consideration of implementation challenges, etc. These practitioners (and some of them are involved in the recruitment of students as development/education practitioners) provide detailed feedback on these interventions. This assignment and the evaluation (including feedback) enable students to act reflectively and realistically to the social problem that they confront as part of their education.

4.4.5 Category C Students: Education Programs to Address Local Issues Scheduled tribes which constitute 10 percent of India’s population are at the lower tier in terms of human development in the country. These people (who can be called indigenous people of India) were traditionally living inside (and depending

65

on) forests for their survival. However, these forests came under the ownership of the government and were used for the needs of the nation in general (or that of the mainstream population) over time. Tribal people were restricted from using the resources (forests) which had previously ensured their survival for generations. However, due to the lack of access to other resources and education, they could not adequately use the opportunities in the modern economy either. (Even when they were provided modern education, they could not use and benefit much from it due to its lack of connection with their own languages, culture and traditional livelihoods). All these factors have led to the marginalisation of tribal people in India.13 Realising the deprived condition of scheduled tribes, the government of India has instituted what is called the ‘Forest Rights Act’14 (FRA) which would restore certain rights of tribal people to use parts of forest resources. However, the implementation of this act is very tardy in many parts of the country. One reason for this is the inadequate preparedness on the part of tribal people (who are mostly less educated) to demand and take proactive actions to assert their rights. The building of these capabilities of tribal people is seen as an important requirement for the effective implementation of the FRA in India. This requires appropriate forms of education and capacity building. Given that most of these tribal people may not have appropriate education to get admitted to a university, education for them has to be conceptualised outside the conventional framework of degree programs of universities. Azim Premji University started collaborating with government training institutes15 to provide a taught course to young people from tribal communities. The course provided knowledge on the importance of Some of these issues are discussed in detail in: https:// practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/development-­ path-for-indigenous-people-lessons-from-­i ndia-­a ndbrazil/; https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu. in/schooling-of-scheduled-tribes-in-india/ 14  https://tribal.nic.in/FRA.aspx#:~:text=The%20 Forest%20Rights%20Act%20(FRA,and%20other%20 socio%2Dcultural%20needs 15  Such as the Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA). 13 

66

the FRA, awareness to create the demand for its implementation, and the skills which are needed to participate in the administrative process for its implementation, to the participants. The demand for such a course came from these communities. When training was provided to enhance the preparedness of elected officials from tribal communities, they demanded the creation of a general-purpose education programme on the FRA for the youngsters of their communities. Here is an example where a university develops an appropriate education programme to meet the needs of a marginalised social group, even though it may not fit well with the kind of acceptable programs of a university. There are many parallels in the development and implementation of adult and continuing education, or university extension, in other countries. Notably Azim Premji University is an independent higher education institution, with a pronounced social purpose. The University of Central Asia (UCA) was established by the Aga Khan Foundation in collaboration with the governments of Kyrgyz, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan. The main goal was to use education for local economic development.16 These countries (which were part of the Former Soviet Union) could historically achieve universal school education. However, there were not many local employment opportunities in these landlocked countries with mountainous terrains. More than two-thirds of the population live in rural areas. Hence migration to other countries in the region (mainly Russia) was an important way of earning income for people in the region. One aim of the university was to see whether an appropriate education could be provided so that young citizens could earn an income locally through a stimulated local economy. The campuses of the UCA were established not in cities but in the most backward and remote areas. Though UCA is conceptualised as a higher eduThis text is based on https://practiceconnect. azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/training-for-localdevelopment-university-­­of-central-asia-part-i/; and https:// p r a c t i c e c o n n e c t . a z i m p r e m j i u n iv e r s i t y. e d u . i n / training-for-local-development-university-of-central-­asia-­ part-ii/

4  Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

cation institute, its social purpose encouraged it to provide skill-oriented Technical and Vocational Education (TVE) to meet the needs of its local population. It started as part of the School of Professional and Continuing education. Such Tertiary Short Cycle (TSC) education programs are popular in Europe (especially in countries like Finland) but are not so common in Central Asia. This programme was designed to meet local needs and to consider local employment opportunities; spoken English, automobile mechanics, and accounting were found to be in demand here. These courses were provided in a flexible manner so that students could acquire the skills within their constraints in terms of residence, livelihood and the ability to pay fees. The quality of these courses was internationally benchmarked with the intervention of independent assessors so that those who completed these courses successfully could signal their proficiency to the world reliably. Though full cost recovery has not been attempted, students are expected to pay a reasonable proportion of the cost as a way to ensure the ownership and sustainability of these programs. Getting and sustaining quality instructors were major challenges. However, the university utilised its international relationships to train such instructors. The university also published a large amount of appropriate learning materials in local languages. Since the university campuses were located in small towns, these courses could enrol a notable share of the targeted population.17 Those who are trained by the university may qualify through the screening tests conducted by employment agencies. Some others may start their own enterprises. There are challenges. All students may not get jobs after the training. This may discourage others from enrolling in such programs. However, this experiment of using a university to address local employment needs can provide important lessons to universities with specific social purposes.

16 

For example, in Khorog, in 2015, 15% of the target population (15–55 years of age) had enrolled in one or other course, and in another town, Naryn, it was 9%. 17 

4.4  Some Examples of Teaching and Learning Programmes that Address Specific Social Purposes

Equivalent issues and proposed university-­ linked solutions exist even in more developed countries. The UK, for example, has been greatly concerned about uneven development across its small islands. The southeast has long enjoyed greatest economic prosperity, leaving some regions relatively economically poorer. Amongst many strategies is a current (at the time of writing, 2022) government strategy (Levelling-up-­ the-united-kingdom). One element involves investing at least 55 per cent of the UK’s domestic research and development funding (most of which goes to universities) outside the south-east by 2024–25.18 Universities are seen as a key resource to stimulate regional economies. Much in this area is described in more detail in our chapter on community engagement.

4.4.6 Category A, B and C Students: Teaching Courses with a Specific Social Purpose As we have noted in other chapters, teaching disciplines like sociology, economics and so on in conventional universities can be designed for traditional undergraduate students at degree level, and need not be aimed at any specific social purpose. However, such teaching may not be useful in those universities which have accepted a specific purpose, or for all universities that accept that their role includes community learning. As emphasised by (Conley 1955) teaching processes for typical undergraduates and for community learners may need to be different. Azim Premji University aims at contributing to the improvement of school education in India. Nearly 50 percent of teenagers do not complete school education currently in the country. This is mainly due to family and socioeconomic factors like poverty and caste and gender discrimination (Santhakumar et  al. 2016). There can be an improvement of educational achievements in https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ levelling-up-the-united-kingdom 18 

67

India only if these debilitating factors arising from family and socioeconomic situations can be addressed. Addressing family and socioeconomic conditions may require two kinds of actions. First, school teachers need to be sensitive to socioeconomic factors which may disable sections of children from attending schools regularly or learning adequately. These teachers may be able to take certain steps to help these children, for example by discussing their issues with parents or providing additional academic support. Secondly, there have to be changes in the socioeconomic environment of these children. This is the main task of development practitioners (including the officials of governmental and non-­ governmental organisations). Hence the linkages between education and development have to be part of the curriculum for teachers and for development practitioners if the objective is to improve the capability of school education in a country like India. It is with this specific purpose that the course namely ‘Education and Development  – Interlinkages’ has been designed and taught at the Azim Premji University. It deals with two kinds of relationship between education and human and social development. First is the contribution of education to human development, which may seem obvious but the course goes into the possible contribution of education towards addressing poverty, discrimination, inequality, and injustice. The normative ideas and actual empirical experiences in this regard are dealt with within the course. Secondly and more importantly, the course deals with how underdevelopment and debilitating socio-economic conditions affect the education of children. How different countries address these problems and what can be attempted in the specific context of India are also part of this course. In order to have a deeper understanding about how these challenges can be addressed in the specific context of India, development practitioners (who have been addressing such challenges in the real world) are also part of this course as co-instructors. When practitioners become part of university courses, usually they may handle different courses on

68

4  Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

their own. This may work against the integration Development-actions and monitoring their of theoretical insights with practice. However, impacts is an important aspect of education in the integration of practice and theory is attempted these contexts, and requires the knowledge of in this course, not only through the involvement multiple disciplines like sociology, economics, of practitioners but also by seeing that their politics, and psychology, and a set of skills to use insights and experience are discussed within an this knowledge-base to design and monitor integrated theory-informed and evidence-­actions. Conventionally, students may have to supported framework. study multiple disciplines from multiple instrucThis course is an attempt to enhance the pre- tors for this purpose. Moreover, conventional paredness of reflective practitioners in the social science courses in these disciplines may domains of education and development. not inculcate the skills which are necessary to Addressing education challenges of children design and implement development actions. In from poorer and marginalised sections may order to address this problem, courses can be require an understanding of the insights of dif- designed to combine all these desirable attributes. ferent disciplines. These include the role of: eco- One such course ‘Social and economic analysis nomics (say to understand the causes and impact for development interventions’ at the Azim of poverty); sociology (to know the possible Premji University has been designed for this impacts of say the caste system and gender dis- purpose. crimination); politics, say to understand the lack The focus in this course is not on specific disof voice of poorer parents in making changes in ciplines, but on relevant but generic aspects the public education system; along with educa- which are necessary to think about, design and tion science (to discuss the pedagogic tools that implement development interventions for povmay be appropriate for children from disadvan- erty eradication, the improvement of educational taged families or even curriculum to think about outcomes, enhancing access to healthcare, appropriate education for groups like indigenous strengthening livelihoods of rural people, etc. people). If the course was not provided, students Attempts are made to integrate lessons from sociwould have to get relevant knowledge and ology, economics, psychology and other relevant insights from multiple courses; and attendance at disciplines to generate insights to inform actions. multiple courses may not lead to a coherent Moreover, a step-by-step approach is developed understanding of the linkages between education which includes procedures for understanding a and development, and what can be attempted to social problem, identifying possible solutions, enable education of the poor and the selection of the most appropriate solution, its less-privileged. design and effective implementation. Though This elective course has run at Azim Premji such a course structure is common in profesUniversity for the past 5  years. We have not sional courses like engineering/management, it is attempted a systematic assessment of the impact not so common for informing social actions. The of this course on the actual preparedness or purpose of highlighting this example is to argue behaviour of students. However, there are some that such a redesign of courses is possible to meet indications: generally, this elective course attracts the needs of universities with specific social the maximum number of students (though they purposes. have many other elective options); and there is a The experience of another course is also worth perception that the students find the course useful mentioning. There is a course titled ‘political in the process of recruitment for jobs in educa- economy, development and governance’ which is tional non-governmental organisations in the aimed at development practitioners as part of the country. curriculum of the Azim Premji University. One

4.5  So, How Well Are Universities Managing to Address Their Social Purposes?

can see somewhat similar courses in conventional universities. For example, a similar course is taught at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The focus of the latter is to create researchers (and most students come with specific disciplinary backgrounds). Hence the lectures and reading lists focus on a variety of literature and methodological approaches to understand political economy issues from around the world. However, the purpose of the political economy course at the Azim Premji University is to enhance the understanding of development practitioners (who may come with diverse disciplinary, educational and employment backgrounds). They should be able to understand the political-economy context of their development actions. Hence the teaching focuses on a coherent way to understand political economy but with an adequate exposure to alternative approaches. An attempt was made to expose students in the university to the readings which are used in MIT (with a lesser focus on the research aspect of these readings but more for its insights on real political economy). The students of the university will acquire capacity to use insights of political economy in their action contexts but may not acquire the capacity to be researchers. The students of MIT may develop capacities to be researchers (who may use their research skills in multiple contexts) but may not be prepared to connect the insights of political economy in their social actions. This example suggests that teaching might serve different purposes in different universities and it can be redesigned to meet the needs of the universities with specific social purposes.

4.5 So, How Well Are Universities Managing to Address Their Social Purposes? Given the diversity of interpretations, expectations and definitions described in this chapter, readers should be encouraged to be understand-

69

ing, and tolerant, if universities are finding some calls on their time challenging. After all, they already do teach nursing, medicine and social work, or provide adult and continuing education more widely, so have for a long time been achieving aspects of their social purpose in the form of graduates able to perform social functions, and provide access to higher education for a wide range of students. Questions about social purpose cannot, of course, be answered solely in the context of particular disciplines or particular groups of graduates. One research project at the University of Otago (Brown et al. 2019) set out to explore whether the institution managed to teach students, in general, to share and care. Such an expectation was implicit within this institution’s aspirations to foster global perspective, environmental literacy, and social responsibility. The research found no evidence of systematic evaluation, or assessment, of the values-based, affective elements of global perspective, environmental literacy and social responsibility as learning outcomes and concluded that these aspects of that institution’s graduate profile were aspirational, or wishful thinking. That research made comparisons with similar research published in several different nations suggesting that institutions make many unvalidated claims in these respects.

4.5.1 Research Approaches to Measure Change A considerable research effort is underway to find research-based approaches to determine the extent to which educational programmes result in changes in learners that might have some impact on students’ later contributions to achieving the sustainable development goals, including some of the social purposes that this book addresses. Brandt et al. (2020) described how teaching in a university teacher-training context related to student teachers’ competence-development in education for sustainable development (ESD).

70

4  Teaching in Universities and Specific Social Purposes

Brown K, Connelly S, Lovelock B, Mainvil L, Mather D, Roberts H, Skeaff S, Shephard K (2019) Do we teach our students to share and to care? Res Post-Compuls Educ 24(4):462–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359674 8.2019.1654693 Brundiers K, Barth M, Cebrián G, Cohen M, Diaz L, Doucette-Remington S, Dripps W, Habron G, Harré N, Jarchow M, Losch K, Michel J, Mochizuki Y, Rieckmann M, Parnell R, Walker P, Zint M (2020) Key competencies in sustainability in higher education—toward an agreed-upon reference framework. Sustain Sci 16(1):13–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11625-­020-­00838-­2 Bryan A (2022) From ‘the conscience of humanity’ to the conscious human brain: UNESCO’s embrace of social-emotional learning as a flag of convenience. Comp J Comp Int Educ. https://doi.org/10.1080/030 57925.2022.2129956 Chankseliani M, Qoraboyev I, Gimranova D (2021) Higher education contributing to local, national, and global development: new empirical and conceptual insights. High Educ 81(1):109–127. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10734-­020-­00565-­8 Conley WH (1955) The University’s role in adult education. J High Educ 26(1):14. https://doi. org/10.2307/1978109 European Commission (High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education) (2013) Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions, report to the European Commission. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/reports/ modernisation_en.pdf Howard A (2013) Negotiating privilege through social justice efforts. In: Maxwell C, Aggleton P (eds) Privilege, agency and affect. Palgrave Macmillan, References London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137292636_5 Krathwohl D, Bloom B, Masia B (1988) Taxonomy of Barrie SC (2012) A research-based approach to generic educational objectives, handbook II: the affective graduate attributes policy. High Educ Res Dev domain. David McKay Co 31(1):79–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012 Lawrie A (2014) The University Extension Movement. In: .642842 Lawrie A (ed) The beginnings of university English: Biggs JB, Tang CS (2011) Teaching for quality learning at extramural study, 1885–1910. Palgrave Macmillan, university: what the student does, 4th edn. McGraw-­ London, pp 56–85 Hill, Society for Research into Higher Education & Santhakumar V, Gupta N, Sripada R (2016) Schooling Open University Press for all in India: can we neglect the demand? Oxford Bloom BS, Hastings JT, Madaus GF (1971) Handbook University Press, Delhi on the formative and summative evaluation of student Schoolman ED, Shriberg M, Schwimmer S, Tysman M learning. McGraw-Hill (2016) Green cities and ivory towers: how do higher Boyer EL (1996) From scholarship reconsidered to scholeducation sustainability initiatives shape millennials’ arship assessed. Quest 48(2):129–139. https://doi.org/ consumption practices? J Environ Stud Sci 6(3):490– 10.1080/00336297.1996.10484184 502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-­014-­0190-­z Brandt J-O, Barth M, Merritt E, Hale A (2020) A matter of Shephard K (2008) Higher education for sustainconnection: the 4 Cs of learning in pre-service teacher ability: seeking affective learning outcomes. education for sustainability. J Clean Prod 279:123749. Int J Sustain High Educ 9(1):87–98. https://doi. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123749 org/10.1108/14676370810842201

Researchers were interested in changes in content knowledge, pedagogical-content knowledge and the willingness to actively support and implement ESD, and used a multiple case-study design on two sequential taught modules. Their mixed-­ methods approach included surveys, focus groups and pre- and post-assessment tools. Qualitative data analysis was based on coding and quantitative data were interpreted using descriptive statistics and paired sample t-tests. While it might be problematic interpreting this particular research article as evidence of relevant education-induced change, the measurement and research-based approach is important to note. Education for social change is an important responsibility. Universities need to put their best research minds to the task. At present authors of this book would be hard pressed to suggest that universities are demonstrably addressing their social purposes through teaching, in broader contexts than manifested in particular groups of graduates. We need to ask if there are particular barriers in place, or particular choices that academics are making, preventing institutions from achieving what they generally tell the world they are attempting to.

References Shephard K (2020) Higher education for sustainability: seeking intellectual Independence in Aotearoa New Zealand. Springer, Singapore. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­981-­15-­1940-­6 Shephard K, Egan T (2018) Higher education for professional and civic values: a critical review and analysis. Sustainability 10(12):4442. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su10124442

71 UNESCO (2017) Education for sustainable development goals: learning objectives, Online at https://unesdoc. unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444 Williamson B (2021) Psychodata: disassembling the psychological, economic, and statistical infrastructure of ‘social-emotional learning’. J Educ Policy 36(1):129–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.20 19.1672895

5

Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

5.1 Introduction Earlier chapters have established that universities have diverse and powerful social purposes. The research that universities do is no doubt a powerful contributor, often focused on improving the economic prosperity of nations and regions. The UKs current ‘levelling up’ policy1 has a significant focus on redistributing research and development to less prosperous parts of the nation, much in partnership with academic institutions. The contribution that university research in New Zealand makes to that nation’s economic prosperity is strongly promoted by the universities’ representative body, as is the promise of greater prosperity with increased higher-education research spending.2 A similar message is extended via India’s National Education Policy,3 emphasising that “Knowledge creation and research are critical in growing and sustaining a large and vibrant economy, uplifting society, and continuously inspiring a nation to achieve even greater heights. (45)”, and commenting on the strong link between a nation’s investment in research and development and its GDP.  That university https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1095544/ Executive_Summary.pdf 2  https://www.universitiesnz.ac.nz/sector-research/ growing-new-zealand-economy 3  https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/ files/NEP_Final_English_0.pdf 1 

research contributes to economic prosperity which in turn contributes to many of the facets of social justice that this book is about, and to the potential achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, is not to be doubted. We can take it for granted that without economic prosperity our nations’ schools, health services and social services cannot function. ‘Economy’ sits alongside ‘environment’ and’ society’ in all models of sustainable development. But what we should doubt is the detail and distribution that underpins links between economic prosperity, GDP and social purpose. There is much in this doubt that relates to traditional ideas about ‘trickle down economies’. Whilst some facets of social justice may be enhanced by a generalisable economic prosperity, others may not. What if the mean prosperity of the people in a nation is enhanced, but patterns of disadvantage for minorities are maintained or even made greater? To what extent might enhanced national-­ economic-­ prosperity impact the examples that we explored in Chap. 1: the widening participation aspirations of lower socioeconomic people in the UK; social justice for lower castes and scheduled tribes in India; and Treaty of Waitangi expectations of Māori in Aotearoa New Zealand? And how might more research in our universities impact on the propensity of those who do go to our universities to behave in environmentallyand socially-just ways in the future? And what of the roles and responsibilities of our universities

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_5

73

74

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

and of our university people in these respects? Will more research funding and enhanced national economic prosperity have a bearing on how these sectors of our communities behave, teach and research? In these contexts, this chapter has three major roles. The first is to question the degree to which traditional university research has had these latter concerns and has been designed or driven to address them. The second is to explore current changes in how the quality of research in our universities is understood, commensurate changes in how it is funded, and the likely impacts of these changes. Changes are occurring and we should be positive at least about their consequential possibilities. Our third task is to explore the nature of research in those universities that have accepted some specific social purposes. We start with our first task, substantially through an analysis of university research and its links to knowledge and knowledge claims explored principally through Santhakumar’s experiences and perspectives.

output.5 Research articles which are published in peer-reviewed journals by the faculty becomes an important factor in the ranking of universities.6 However, this expectation that universities would generate new knowledge is realised only to a limited extent. If we take all universities in the world, probably only a small share of them is active in such knowledge generation. Altbach (2009) notes that there are only very few research universities, and these are rare in developing countries. Though many universities aspire to be research universities, their contribution to research is limited. As we discuss in this chapter, the research of those universities that do research has certain dominant features. Some of these features may not be appropriate to meet specific social purposes.

5.2.1 Research on Generalisable Insights and Its Usefulness for Specific Social Purposes

Research in conventional universities tends to prioritise universally generalisable insights and 5.2 Traditional Drivers we understand that these are useful to the world for University Research in a general sense or in the long-run. This is true and Their Links to Social not only for natural sciences (where universality Purpose is somewhat obvious) but also in social sciences. Kukull and Ganguli (2012) describe the nature of Universities are expected to be important spaces research generalisability and its limitations and for the generation and dissemination of knowl- Tiokhin et  al. (2019) describe the importance edge. It may be that the goal of higher education of generalisability in the social sciences. necessitates the concentration of a set of well-­ Generalisability implies, for example, that findeducated people (or researchers) in universities ings from a study that is conducted on a sample and hence it is normal to expect these people to population should be extendable to the populagenerate new knowledge.4 There are synergies tion at large, or transferable to other populations. between research and teaching. Research is expected to help teaching since the former may encourage university teachers to be in touch with 5 This could be partly due to the tangible nature of research or aware of the frontiers of their discipline. In output in peer reviewed journals. However the quality of teaching is a lot more intangible, and the ways to measure many universities, academics’ performance is it through the evaluation by students, may lead to primarily assessed by evaluating their research contestations. Nearly 15–30 percent of the weight in Times World Ranking of Universities is based on research and citations. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/sites/default/ files/breaking_news_files/the_2021_world_university_ rankings_methodology_24082020final.pdf (Retrieved on 16 October, 2022). 6 

The building of research university is a nineteenth century phenomenon started in West Europe (mainly Germany). Normatively, it pursued the integration of teaching and research. Refer Altbach (2011). 4 

5.2  Traditional Drivers for University Research and Their Links to Social Purpose

This is an important consideration for the publication in international journals which have a high impact (say in terms of the number of citations) and which tend not to accept papers based, for example, on studies in individual institutions, or small communities. But much social science research is qualitative and inductive and based on small samples. It produces insightful possibilities, albeit often with limited generalisability, and often limited opportunities for publication in peer-reviewed journals. This concern about generalisability may limit opportunities for research for specific special purposes. Academics in conventional universities may not have enough incentives to carry out, for example, location-­ specific research (Chavarro et al. 2017), due to its lesser acceptance for publication in top-rated journals and among peers. The reduced value of such research may affect academics’ career growth in universities or the academic world in general if they choose to undertake it. For example,7 the field of academic sociology is managed in ways that reward the communication of ideas and research to other sociologists via refereed publication in academic journals or the presentation of peer reviewed conference papers. However, the work of applied sociologists tends to be generated ‘from the ground up’ and is inherently focused on documenting social needs, critiquing existing social policy, lobbying for enhancements in service provision, completing research consultancies or developing new and innovative policy solutions to difficult social problems.

5.2.2 Ideology and Research for Social Purposes There appears to be no doubt that much research in social sciences is ideology driven. Research focused on environmental and social justice may be particularly so, but many social scientists are influenced by a normative (and sometimes, ideological) vision of society (Reis 1964). See for example, https://sociologyatwork.org/2011/06/08/ editorial/ 7 

75

This normative vision has not necessarily helped universities to pursue specific social purposes, such as the creation of rural managers, school teachers for poorer students, or practitioners for local area development, as these specific goals were not that important to those who are wedded to a radical transformation of society. For example, the institute for the creation of social workers in the early part of the twentieth century was seen by some social scientists as helping either charity or compradors of capitalism (Ashenberg et  al. 1988) rather than structural transformation of society. In another example, a movement that was aimed at imparting literacy to all in India in the 1990s faced sharp criticism from academic intellectuals for different reasons: (a) Literacy is not wholesome education; (b) It is not aiming at a radical transformation of society; and (c) the movement happened in collaboration with the state, which according to these intellectuals was interested in sustaining the status quo.8 Some argue that academic social science is not driven by a practical vision of social change (Watts 2017), that anti-developmental attitudes have been strengthened by post-modernism and cultural relativism (Blaikie 2000) and by the deep ecology movement (Grey 1986) and that development itself is a colonial project (Bowles and Veltmeyer 2020). In conventional universities, much discourages the kind of research which could contribute directly to social change.

5.2.3 Research in Conventional Universities Is Often Driven by the Need for Theory Theory enables a generalisable insight on events/ actions in different contexts. Application of theory distils research into a statement about “social life that holds transferable applications to other settings, context, populations, and possibly time

See Santhakumar’s discussions with M. P. Parameswaran who played a key role in the initiation of the National Literacy Movement in India https://practiceconnect. azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/quality-schooling-for-alllessons-from-the-total-literacy-­campaign/ 8 

76

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

periods” (Saldaña and Omasta 2018, 257). It is better to have an explicit theoretical lens even in empirical research since otherwise some hidden understanding may lead to the selection of events or units for analysis (Lewin 1951). There cannot be purely a-theoretical empirical research (Guba and Lincoln 1994). However, such a need for theory has perhaps evolved to a stage where it can become the major driving force of research. It can influence the thinking of researchers even when the underlying objective conditions have changed (David 2005). Each theory may create a mental model of reality and some of these mental models may not be connected to the actual reality (World Bank 2015). If it is connected to the reality of one part of the world, it may influence the thinking of even those researchers whose reality is different.

5.2.4 What Determines Desirable Research Within Disciplines and Between Disciplines? Desirable research in each discipline is determined more by the internal paradigms of the discipline (which is also connected to the sociology of the discipline), than by the requirements of socioeconomic context. Research paradigms in disciplines are slow to change (Kuhn 1962). In addition, the way universities are organised is much more conducive for encouraging research within disciplines than between disciplines. There is an extensive academic discourse on the challenges of multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research that is highly relevant to our interest in social purpose (see as examples, Trussell et  al. 2017; Tkachenko and Ardichvili 2020). Yet many social issues need such analysis. Let us consider a specific example from India. Open defecation is practised by a significant share of the Indian population. This is harmful in multiple ways like the increase in water-borne diseases, the pollution of water bodies, and increases in worm infestation, especially among children. This can lead to malnourishment among children even when they eat adequate food

(due to the presence of worms as parasites in their body). India is known for a high level of malnutrition among its children. The lack of enough nutrition in children can have a negative impact on their cognitive development, the ability to learn and life-long achievements. For all these reasons, open defecation is to be avoided and these people have to be encouraged to use toilets. What encourages people to practise open defecation? It could be due to multiple factors. Poverty, inability to construct toilets, etc. could be the probable reasons that may come to the attention of researchers and policy-makers. However, there are indications that sections of people are not willing to move out of this practice even when their incomes go up as evident from their use of better-quality houses, electronic equipment like TV sets or even motor bikes (Coffey et al. 2014). Many people seem to think that open defecation is not such a bad practice. The cultural attributes which encourage people to consider the presence of a toilet within or very close to home as ‘impure’ may discourage some of them from having such a toilet. The occasional cleaning of sewage pits (which is necessary in India due to the absence of centralised sewage disposal systems) was traditionally considered the job of lower castes, and the one not to be done by upper castes. These caste norms discourage lower-caste people from doing it currently but upper castes are not willing to do it on their own. All these indicate that an understanding of the practice of open defecation and what needs to be attempted to avoid this problem cannot be informed by research in any one discipline but may require multi- and interdisciplinary approaches which are not that common in conventional universities. It may not be enough to encourage research in multiple disciplines to understand such social issues (which is the usual practice in conventional universities). There are two limitations here. First, implications of certain interactions between multiple aspects of social reality may be lost in this research in multiple disciplines (independently). Secondly, there is

5.2  Traditional Drivers for University Research and Their Links to Social Purpose

a need to combine the insights from multiple disciplines, and there may not be an allocation of the responsibility to generate such an overall perspective. Hence inter-disciplinary research ­ should become part of the culture of universities with specific social purposes.

5.2.5 Quantitative Research Paradigms Dominate Some Research Fields But Limit the Research Questions That Can Be Asked Some forms of research, especially quantitative research, benefit from the use of control groups, randomised trials and statistical approaches such as multivariate analysis. Such research collects data on all independent variables which could impact the outcomes of, for example, researchable interventions. Then the contribution of each independent variable (including the intervention) can be estimated by controlling for the impact of all other such variables. This may give a reasonable account of the contribution of, for example, an educational intervention (within some reasonable margin of error). Much research in the social sciences cannot use these approaches (Heckman and Smith 1995; Muller 2015; Hoffmann 2018). Control groups for many social issues are difficult to control and limited resources limit the collection of data. Identifying all factors which may have an impact on an outcome, collecting relevant data on all these factors, and conducting a multivariate analysis correctly may all be beyond the resource capacity of many social organisations, especially in developing and poorer countries. As a consequence, inductive, qualitative case-study and action-research approaches are widely adopted in the social sciences. They are also accepted as bone-fide research approaches in many settings and increasingly so in others. Quantitative and qualitative research approaches make different assumptions about data and the roles of research and ask different questions from quantitative research (Kuhn 1962; Guba 1978). Academics in

77

universities that adopt specific social purposes, in particular, need to develop such ways of researching systematically and incorporate these into their research of social phenomena and the evaluation of education programs’ impacts on these. They will no doubt be important approaches to enable all educational institutions to better understand their own practices.

5.2.6 What About Consulting by Academics? Does That Help Specific Social Purposes? There is a limited literature on consulting by academics by higher education researchers (Boyer and Lewis 1984; Perkmann and Walsh 2008). There are concerns about consulting by academics, such as whether it generates good quality research or not, whether the involvement in consulting benefits or affects the other responsibilities of academics and the precise definitions of consulting and research (Klakurka and Irwin 2015). We should be particularly interested in whether or not consulting can be an adequate pathway to generate knowledge in universities that adopt specific social purposes. To make progress in this complex field of inquiry we take the specific case of academics who adopt consulting roles, where there is a client who is willing to pay for providing a knowledge input that is not necessarily destined to enter the public domain. There is often an element of research and knowledge generation in this consulting work. This may be more common in the case of certain academic domains. The research/ analysis of the functioning of a private company by a professor of management can be used to enhance its efficiency (and profits). Then the owners/managers of this company may have the incentive to pay the professor. That is one reason why we see management professors making notable amounts of money through consulting assignments. There are other situations where somebody is willing to pay for knowledge generation by academics. An international organisation which is going to fund (as a loan or grant) a

78

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

program in a developing country with a specific purpose may have to select the most appropriate (say, socially and environmentally) and effective project/program. The research into this aspect is directly useful to the international organisation, and to wider society, since it may enhance the effectiveness of the funding. This can be a source of consultant assignments for economists or sociologists. On the other hand, the impacts of many other academic activities are intangible, long term, uncertain, but also derived by the society as a whole. These may be ‘public goods’9 as discussed in economics. Perhaps no single body has a direct incentive to pay for this research. There can be a free-riding or collective-action problem in the payment for research which benefits public goods (or services). This may reduce the possibility of consultant assignments for the majority of natural and social science academics in universities (Dell Rossi and Hersch 2020). Hence one should not be surprised to see few consulting assignments in domains of this kind. It should be clear that there is not necessarily a strong relationship between the availability of consulting work and the quality of the academic research that results from it. It may simply mean that there is a direct market for some academics’ work and less so for others. We should not expect consulting to be a major incentive for academics to generate research that is useful for specific social purposes. There are of course strong links between this argument, and the broader issues of knowledge transfer, community engagement, boosting economic prosperity, and the particular nature of the social purposes of the universities that are being considered; all of which are addressed in more detail below.

A typical example of a public good is a street light. When one person uses the street light, a few others can use it at the same time. It is difficult to exclude somebody from getting the benefit of a streetlight. Hence there can be collective action problems in the provision of streetlights. There is no customer who may be willing to pay for the streetlight, and hence such services are to be provided by the government by using tax resources. 9 

5.2.7 Summarising Traditional Drivers for University Research and Their Links to Social Purpose In summary, the common features of research in conventional universities impose severe constraints on the development of knowledge for specific social purposes. Such purposes may require knowledge that contributes to the practice of social change which may not be a high priority for research in conventional universities. This kind of knowledge has to take into account real-­ world challenges, and it cannot be one that is shaped by the currently dominant paradigm in one or other discipline or the need for generalisable insights which can be published in international peer-reviewed journals. Nevertheless, the latter kind of research is seen by the international academic community as the ideal, and something for all academics to strive for. However, many academics, particularly those in non-elite universities, constantly attempt and fail in this regard, rather than work with another ideal that may be more suitable for universities’ social purposes.

5.3 Specific Social Purposes and Knowledge Claims It should be clear that much in these arguments relates not simply to the nature of research, but to the ways in which different forms of research are valued in universities. We define research as ‘systematic enquiry made public’. Action research, inductive research and qualitative research can all be as systematic as the most organised randomised trial. ‘Made public’ does not mean only via international journals and international conferences, it can also be via, for example, educational research seminars in academic departments. But in many academic institutions, research using approaches appropriate to social purposes is not valued as highly as research using more conventional research approaches, research into teaching within disciplines is not valued as highly as research about the discipline itself, research about the practices of the institution itself is

5.3  Specific Social Purposes and Knowledge Claims

hardly valued at all, and the universal gold standard is clearly research that finds its way into peer-reviewed journals. It would be good to think that teachers in institutions with specific social purposes would be encouraged to use diverse forms of research, but our other chapters have suggested that quality judgments about academic work in general in these institutions is similar to those used elsewhere. There are two additional broad and significant academic discourses that need to be introduced here: SoTL (scholarship of teaching and learning) and ESD (education for sustainable development). SoTL calls for far more emphasis on research into teaching and learning within the university sector (see for example, Brogt et al. 2020). ESD calls for substantial changes in the educational outcomes sought by our universities, and for some, for a repurposing of higher education itself (see for example, Stewart et al. 2022). Much within this chapter advocates for new institutions with specific social purposes. Both SoTL and ESD use similar criticisms of higher education to advocate for systematic change in HE. At the heart of all three discourses are concerns about knowledge production and consequential knowledge claims. We should be interested in how knowledge is produced and valued, or validated, and what claims those who generate knowledge make about it. Whether the claims relate to the development of disciplinary knowledge, positive impacts on social or environmental justice, impacts on economic prosperity or the workings of higher education institutions themselves, we need to be interested, and critical. Knowledge production and dissemination are significant functions of research universities. In situations where universities are used for specific social purposes, there would be questions on ‘what kinds of knowledge’ or ‘what is judged as (appropriate) knowledge’. This may necessitate the discussion of knowledge claims or validation mechanisms of knowledge. We take a view that claims about the quality of research outputs and outcomes, and to some extent about knowledge itself, are socially constructed (Myers 1985) but these may be shaped

79

by the imperatives of the context; there may be rational reasons for asserting specific claims in specific contexts. In that sense, the knowledge claims which are widely used in conventional universities may have a rational basis. Whether universities with specific social purposes require a different knowledge claim or not would be a key issue. In our view, there may be three important questions regarding this issue: • Is there a difference in the way knowledge is legitimised in different societies? Do different social/cultural contexts (like western versus non-western societies) have different notions on what is an appropriate knowledge? • Does the focus on specific social purposes in certain universities also mean the development/nurturing of a knowledge which is different from that of conventional universities? • How is knowledge for specific social purposes valued and used by our universities? We attempt to discuss these questions based on the literature and our experience, in the following paragraphs.

5.3.1 Different Knowledge(s) in Different Contexts? The idea that people belonging to different cultures think differently has received greater attention in recent decades. For example, Markus and Kitayama (1991, 224) note: … people in different cultures have strikingly different construals of the self, of others, and of the interdependence of the 2. These construals can influence, and in many cases determine, the very nature of individual experience, including cognition, emotion, and motivation. Many Asian cultures have distinct conceptions of individuality that insist on the fundamental relatedness of individuals to each other. The emphasis is on attending to others, fitting in, and harmonious interdependence with them. American culture neither assumes nor values such an overt connectedness among individuals.

80

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

The implications of such perspectives on research are also discussed by Marginson and Yang (2021) and Xu (2022). This perceived divide in terms of the way of thinking is perhaps widest between the so called western and non-western societies. There is some empirical basis to the perception that the people in the West think analytically and those in the East holistically (Masuda and Nisbett 2001). This difference can reflect at the brain/cognition level too (Zhu et al. 2006). The impacts at the level of cognition may imply possibly different ways of judging what is (socially or culturally) valuable as knowledge. Whenever there are problems in the use of a global/international knowledge system, say that behind the green revolution, one argument focuses on the western-basis of this knowledge system and its inappropriateness in non-western contexts. Shiva (2016), for example, argues that problems associated with the green revolution10 in India were caused by the neglect of indigenous knowledge and the imposition of western science on indigenous agriculture. The green revolution is responsible for feeding India’s increasing population, but has also contributed to massive social change and environmental damage on a grand scale. This division implies that people in non-­ western societies have a different way of judging what is correct in their daily lives (or in their deliberations on what is good or valuable). According to this view, the approach that is claimed to be the basis of modern science, is not built upon the knowledge claims of non-western societies and may have only limited use in these societies. Like many other debates on such issues, it may be difficult to be neutral. It may be possible to be aware of one’s own position based on one’s own experience and exposure to the literature. Such a transparency may be useful for the readers of a book like this one. There is evidence on how people think based on recent studies of neurological science and behavioural experiments, and these indicate three A period of technology transfer involving inorganic fertilisers, pesticides, herbicides and plant breeding, from developed nations to less developed nations. 10 

tendencies: (a) people may think instinctually and not deliberately; (b) people are influenced by their peers in their thinking and actions; and (c) people may use mental models of reality in their thinking and some of these mental models of reality need not be connected to the actual reality (reviewed by World Bank 2015). Such tendencies are seen all over the world and can be seen among people with (western) modern education. People may not correct their perceptions based on available information and new information may be filtered by preconceived notions (Baron 1985). An interesting example of this tendency is noted in the United States of America. Though the voters of the Republican Party are on an average more highly educated than those of the Democratic Party, the former is more likely to consider climate change as fictitious (Hamilton 2008). This is despite the availability of substantial scientific information on climate change in the public domain. All this may indicate that the majority of people may not be rational or analytical in their daily lives as it is constructed in modern science. This could be true even in western societies where the rationality of modern science seems to have a greater influence. When instincts, peers, and socially constructed mental models influence the thinking of human beings, it is not surprising to see people depend on their own claims rather than a universal and homogeneous validation mechanism to decide the correctness of knowledge. However, this reality does not mean that scientific temper and associated rationality can be abandoned. Global challenges like climate change or local challenges like the persistence of open defecation (even among non-poor households in India) indicate the need for inculcation of scientific temper. The other way to understand this issue of different interpretations of knowledge in different contexts is to think about the imperatives of the modern economy. Whatever be the value of traditional knowledge to Chinese society, its current behaviour as an active participant in global production and consumption is almost impossible without internalising the technology of production which is more and more homogenous in

5.3  Specific Social Purposes and Knowledge Claims

international contexts. Chinese education also seems to have internalised and excelled in this process. The way a set of Chinese universities have reached the top positions in global ranking of universities11 (at least in part by the publication of research articles in top-rated journals) also show the willingness and readiness of Chinese academics to participate in knowledge production of a homogenous or universal kind. We may take note of the possible existence of different knowledge claims in different societies (in the past or currently). It could be that those claims which are supported/validated by traditional practices may have originally existed all over the world (including western countries). However, the economic development or modernisation may have enhanced the attractiveness of certain knowledge claims. Rather than seeing such modernisation as a perfect project in a positivist sense, we may see it as a transition which requires closer observation, reflection and course correction. The knowledge and claims which validate it may also require such close scrutiny. It could be that certain claims which were neglected due to the dominance of one or other, may acquire certain attractiveness over time as part of this scrutiny and experimentation (as argued by the United Nations University, in the context of co-­ production of knowledge, Raygorodetsky 2011). Perhaps such analysis does not justify the rejection of the knowledge that is informed by modern science, but rather listening also to knowledge claims inherent to traditional cultures. We should extend our argument for different knowledges in different contexts, to different forms of knowledge and knowledge claims within universities themselves. Universities clearly contribute to the creation of disciplinary knowledge, validated by peer review and made public via books and journal articles. But universities also make claims about their functioning, performance, objectives and institutional values using entirely different means of quality assurance or validation. University leaders pledge their institution’s contribution, and that of their https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00084-7

11 

81

students through what they learn, to the sustainable development goals and to the Talloires Declaration. Where knowledge is created to support these claims, it is rarely subject to the same degree of peer review and data transparency afforded to their disciplinary research, but rather validated essentially by reputation, and trust. Clearly universities do cherish the notion of different knowledges in different contexts.

5.3.2 Do Specific Social Purposes, in Specific Educational Contexts, Also Involve Nurturing a Knowledge Which Is Different from That of Conventional Universities? We may not question the notion that modern, generalisable theories have great explanatory power and may have great relevance (Lakotas 1970). However, there may be specific cases which may require universities to deal with knowledge systems which are different from that of conventional universities. Many cultures exist on our planet, and each could be said to have a right to develop itself using, for example, research, teaching and community engagement facilitated by universities. And yet in nations that are home to multiple cultures, higher education has a tendency to be devoted to one particular culture. One specific social purpose of universities might be to address the needs of each culture in a nation, perhaps and in particular by operating in the language of that culture. The traditional knowledge of indigenous people has both instrumental and intrinsic benefits to these people as well as to humanity as a whole. It may be that the education of indigenous people becomes most effective if the new knowledge that they get can be connected to their traditional knowledge (Angelo et al. 2022; Nyong et al. 2007) but that does not negate a fundamental expectation of advancement of their own culture. Aspects of these arguments relating to teaching and learning were addressed in our chapter on teaching, but the argument has a similar basis pertaining to the research roles of universities.

82

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

Differences between multicultural and intercultural education, and the major challenges inherent to the latter, have been addressed by UNESCO, in line with that body’s obligation to guide educational policy worldwide (UNESCO n.d.). The major challenge when discussing the issue of education and multiculturalism is dealing with some of the inherent tensions that arise in reconciling competing worldviews with each other. Such tensions reflect the diversity of values which co-­ exist in a multicultural world. Often, they cannot be resolved in a single ‘either/or’ solution. However, the dynamic interchange between competing aspects is what lends richness to the debate on education and multiculturalism. One significant tension arises from the nature of Intercultural Education itself, which accommodates both universalism and cultural pluralism. (UNESCO n.d., np)

Higher education is challenged to imagine how universalism and cultural pluralism can exist alongside one another. Recent developments in these regards in Aotearoa New Zealand are described in a section below.

5.3.3 How Is Knowledge for Specific Social Purposes Valued and Used by Our Universities? Can the knowledge that is legitimate in conventional universities be used for all kinds of specific social purposes? Does the use of knowledge for specific social purposes require a different validation process (even if the nature of the knowledge itself is not very different from that in conventional universities)? There are different imperatives to make knowledge that is available in conventional universities useful for specific social purposes. At the extremes, knowledge for publication (in peer reviewed journals) and knowledge for use to make a change in society, may have common elements but may require different validation systems. On the one hand, even if the knowledge is validated by peers (for publication in journals), it may face contestation by different stakeholders when it is used for social purposes. Secondly, given the limited purpose of generating knowledge in conventional universi-

ties, most academics may not be used to the imperatives of generating knowledge that are required for social purposes. For example, it is not common for social science research (say that in economics and sociology) to analyse what intervention would address a specific social problem. Tools such as randomised control trials may not generate useful information that is necessary for social change. Hence additional practices may be needed to ensure that the knowledge that is generated in conventional universities become useful tools for social change, even if these practices may not be in tune with the validation mechanisms that are widely used in universities. For example, the commentaries and suggestions based on accumulated knowledge of academics can be an input into public discussions on social change. However, many academics shy away from making these commentaries without doing research on each and every context. However, such research (a) may not answer the question on what enables change even when it understands the social situation that is to be changed: and (b) may not be feasible in each and every context due to the lack of financial and human resources and time. In summary, this note does not argue for universities with specific social purposes to focus on different knowledge systems (or those with different knowledge claims). Instead, it argues for the use of knowledge that is available in conventional universities with validation means, or assessments of quality, which are more appropriate to the specific and practical use. There may be a need for validation mechanisms which may include more participation of non-academics, for example those who benefit from or are affected by the research, or political and official decision-­ makers. There could be more public discussions/ contestations on the effectiveness of a knowledge or research input. Such processes are widely adopted in some disciplines already (see for example Beck and Stolterman 2016, with respect to product design). Changes are certainly underway in some nations, to be described in the next section. It may be that the universities with specific social purposes need a variety of means to determine which knowledge is useful or not,

5.4  The Impact Debate and Its Impact on the Social Purposes of Universities

beyond the one that is predominant in conventional universities, that is the publication in peer-­ reviewed journals. Such arguments could be interpreted as being against academic freedom, but it is also possible that academia’s current focus on publication in peer-reviewed journals as the primary indicator of quality is also antagonistic to the academic freedom of those academics who see their primary role in society as making a difference to society. We should now move on to explore current changes in how the quality of research in our universities is understood, commensurate changes in how it is funded, and the likely impacts of these changes. Much within the following section addresses at least some of Authors’ concerns explored above.

5.4 The Impact Debate and Its Impact on the Social Purposes of Universities This book’s authors are not alone in doubting the traditional means by which the quality of research approaches in higher education have been encouraged and assessed. Long standing international debates have expressed concerns about many facets of our criticism in the sections above. But it would be fair to say that the concerns expressed are certainly not unified, and concerns about the ways in which university research contributes to higher education’s social purposes have neither been uniform nor at the top of the list for change. Nevertheless, the impact of research has become an important criterion around the world in recent years. ‘Impact’ means different things in different places and different contexts. The UK, for example, uses a Research Excellence Framework12 (REF) for the following purposes: • “To provide accountability for public investment in research and produce evidence of the benefits of this investment.

https://www.ref.ac.uk/about-the-ref/what-is-the-ref/

12 

83

• To provide benchmarking information and establish reputational yardsticks, for use within the HE sector and for public information. • To inform the selective allocation of funding for research.” (REFa 2021, np) Although this list of purposes is not explicit about the nature of impact, it is clear that peer and expert review, and review by ‘research users’ is a key part of this determination. “The REF is a process of expert review, carried out by expert panels for each of the 34 subject-based units of assessment (UOAs), under the guidance of four main panels. Expert panels are made up of senior academics, international members, and research users.” (REFa 2021, np). Research impact has been an important measure in the REF since 2014. Currently, it is one of three assessed elements. “For each submission, three distinct elements are assessed: the quality of outputs (e.g. publications, performances, and exhibitions), their impact beyond academia, and the environment that supports research.” (REFa 2021, np). Notably, in the REF process, impact is not a measure of research quality. Impact does however contribute to an overall assessment of an institution’s research, and considerable funding and prestige is attached to it. There is every hope that these extrinsic motivators will influence the way that individual institutions encourage and reward their academics for the research that they do. In 2021 impact was assessed using case studies submitted by institutions to demonstrate the nature of research impact that they themselves valued. The case studies are in the public domain13 and provide readers with a perspective that institutions, academics, peer reviewers and ‘research users’ in the UK have significant appreciation for research that contributes to social purpose, and that this appreciation extends far beyond boosting national economic prosperity. One case study, strongly related to the theme of this book, will illustrate the perspective.

https://results2021.ref.ac.uk/impact

13 

84

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose Achieving fairer admission to UK universities.14 Research led by Durham Sociology’s Professor Vikki Boliver has been used by the UK government to press higher-tariff universities to close longstanding ethnic inequalities in university acceptance rates and to make admissions data available to researchers, policy makers and the general public. Further research published by Professor Boliver and Durham colleagues since 2017 has been used to support reinvigorated national widening participation and fair access policies in England and Scotland, centred on the use of contextual data about the socioeconomic circumstances of applicants to inform admissions decisions. This body of research has helped to bring about a paradigm shift in the way universities assess applicant merit and has helped kick-start a new and sustained trend towards more equitable access to higher-tariff universities for prospective students from different ethnic groups and socioeconomic backgrounds. (REFb 2021).

principle15 have redefined research to address NZ’s multicultural characteristics and needs: For the purposes of the PBRF, research is defined as a process of investigation or inquiry leading to new, recovered, or reinterpreted knowledge or understanding which is effectively shared and capable of rigorous assessment by the appropriate experts. In Aotearoa New Zealand our distinctive research cultures and environments draw on diverse ontological, epistemological, and methodological traditions of critical inquiry, experimentation, and knowledge-creation. This definition of research includes Māori ways of knowing, being, and conducting rangahau such as kaupapa Māori and mātauranga Māori; diverse Pacific ways of knowing, being, and conducting research; and work that embodies new insights of direct relevance to the specific needs of iwi, hapū, marae, communities, government, scholarship and teaching, industry, and commerce, which may be developed through collaborative and practice-led processes involving stakeholders from those constituencies.

It remains to be seen how much impact this way of assessing research impact will have on the Research can be an individual or collective process nature of research undertaken by academics in and may be embodied in the form of artistic works, UK universities, on their individual commitment performances, designs, policies, or processes that lead to novel or substantially improved insights. to social purpose, and on how such things will be (TEC 2022, 7) measured, evaluated, assessed, or researched in the future. In some respects, Aotearoa New Zealand’s Agreements in principle have also reconstructed effort towards increasing research impact looks ideas about quality to harmonise with such perset to extending even further than the U.K.’s. That ceptions of need: nation’s REF-equivalent is the Performance For the purposes of the Quality Evaluation, Based Research Fund (PBRF), a tool used by the research excellence will be assessed in terms of originality, rigour, reach, and significance, with Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) to direct reference to the quality standards appropriate to funding to institutions and so to have some the subject area and to the unique nature of impact on the ways that universities themselves Aotearoa New Zealand’s research cultures and encourage and reward research. As described needs. elsewhere in this book, Aotearoa New Zealand is Excellence will be assessed across the following attempting to address its multi-ethnic populaareas of activity: tion’s aspiration for higher education and its obli› The production and creation of knowledge, gations to Māori people under its Treaty of including ontologies, epistemologies, and methodologies unique to Māori and to Pacific Waitangi. Higher education is one of many communities; government-­funded sectors that is encouraged to › The dissemination and application of that knowladdress current perceived inequities and Treaty-­ edge within academic and/or other communibreaches. The next round of PBRF (likely in ties and its impact outside the research environment; and 2026) is being developed, in particular, to direct research towards these ends. Agreements in https://www.tec.govt.nz/assets/Publications-and-others/ PBRF-Publications/TEC-In-Principle-Decisions-and-­ Summary-of-Feedback-on-Research-Definitions.pdf 15 

https://results2021.ref.ac.uk/impact/b447512a-c5f7-­ 4a50-b779-d8f2951f59af/pdf 14 

5.5  What Could Be the Nature of Research in Universities with Specific Social Purposes? › Activity which sustains and develops the research environment, within and across both academic and non-academic domains. For the purposes of the Quality Evaluation, the impact of research is defined as a positive effect on, change, or benefit to society, culture, the environment, or the economy at any level, outside the research environment. Impacts on scholarship, research, or the advancement of knowledge within the research environment are not included. (TEC 2022, 11)

Notably, Aotearoa New Zealand has been specific about its categories of research impact, for example incorporating benefits to the economy alongside direct benefits to society; whilst adopting the UK approach of separating notions of research impact from those of research quality. Apparently high-quality research can continue to have no discernible impact on an institution’s social purpose, and high-impact research can have its impact by boosting a nation’s economic prosperity without directly affecting those social purposes that are not themselves stimulated by national economic prosperity. As with the UK, it remains to be seen how much impact this way of assessing research and research impact will have on the nature of research undertaken by academics in NZ universities, on their individual commitment to social purpose, and on how such things will be measured, evaluated, assessed, or researched in the future. Recent developments in the UK and in Aotearoa New Zealand do suggest a government-­ based (and so perhaps society-based) tendency to redirect some funding, and encouragement, towards applied social purposes, based primarily on academic peer review, and away from research focused on advancing disciplines or fundamental knowledge, a traditional focus also based on academic peer review. The situation is, of course, additionally complex because universities also compete with one another in national and international rankings, also based to a degree on academic peer review, both through judgements of academic reputation and through judgments about articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals; both also, of course, judged through peer review. Change depends on either having different peer reviewers for different purposes, by processes

85

other than happenstance, or a generalised change in the orientation of academic peers towards the diversity of academic roles. If this complexity appears strange to academic readers just imagine how odd it must appear to readers not conversant with the ways of universities. A great deal of thought has been expended on how effective scholarly peer-review actually is at directing and quality assuring the research efforts of academics in our universities. Most attempts to consider this conundrum identify it as a deeply-flawed process, albeit likely less deeply flawed than others that have been attempted. Even so, it does appear that even modern notions of research impact, and of research quality, have struggled to find anything to complement or replace the power of peer review. This chapter moves on to consider attempts by some institutions that have adopted specific social purposes, to address these purposes via the research efforts of their academic staff. Again, our focus is on such institutions in India.

5.5 What Could Be the Nature of Research in Universities with Specific Social Purposes? In the following sections we highlight certain cases where research in universities have been reoriented to meet specific social purposes. Many initiatives for facilitating social innovation have developed in premier technology institutes in India.16 For example, the foremost science institute of India, The Indian Institute of Science, called for the development of technologies appropriate for the rural areas of India.17 However, these initiatives are seen as peripheral to the core purpose of these institutions and get marginalised over time in these mainstream science and technology institutes.

One such initiative is described here: https://csie.iitm. ac.in/SocialProjectsIITM.html 17  For a detailed description, see https://connect.iisc.ac. in/2017/10/it-took-many-years-to-develop-thesetechnologiesbut-­today-they-are-helping-society/ 16 

86

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

We mention below a few other examples from universities which have adopted a specific social purpose. These may be taken as indicative examples since the longer-term impact of these practices on the functioning of universities or their social purposes have not been assessed. Moreover, and as described above, there are challenges in the full realisation of the potential of these alternative practices.

5.5.1 Research to Connect with Practice We have described the challenges to conduct research that meets specific social purposes above. A modest attempt is made at the Azim Premji University to address some of these challenges. Since the university aims at creating reflective practitioners in the domains of education and development, its research should be one that is connected to practices in these domains. The knowledge that is developed by the university should contribute to the practice on the one hand, and the education of practitioners on the other hand. The practice should inform the knowledge generation in the university too. In order to achieve these goals, an initiative called University-Practice Connect18 was put in place. This initiative has a number of objectives: (A) It encourages university academics to research interesting and innovative practices in the domains of education and development, and prepare reflective documents. These documents highlight not only the successes or positive outcomes of these practices but also their challenges and limitations. These reflective documents are expected to provide an academic view to practitioners too. For example, it has looked at the project of a philanthropic foundation that provides digital learning materials to government schools.19 The philanthropic foundation found

The details can be seen in https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ 19  https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu. in/5491-2/ 18 

the suggestions in the document useful.20 There are positive aspects in the project but there is scope for notable improvement too. (B) The initiative encourages university academics to identify insights from theoretical and academic literature which can be used by practitioners in specific domains of action. It is difficult for practitioners to have an adequate exposure to the developments in theory and academic research in general; but they may benefit from these usable insights from the literature. For example, environmental and social investments are getting significant attention globally these days. Why do people make these kinds of investments along with those which are aimed at higher financial returns? The discussion of different kinds of motivations of people are summarised in an article21written by academics in the behavioural sciences. It also talks about the implications of each kind of motivation for investments for environmental and social purposes. (C) Academics can learn important lessons on social change from specific contexts. These lessons can be beneficial to those who try to bring about changes in similar contexts. As an example, one article looks at the schooling and work participation of girls in Indonesia in comparison with India.22 This article demonstrates that dowry and patrilocal residence23 which work against the education and employment of girls in India, are not prevalent in a similar developing country like Indonesia. Though there can be underlying cultural differences, there is nothing essential about these practices. These insights are useful for social actions which enable the education and employment of girls in India.

Based on Santhakumar’s discussions with the Adani Foundation which carries out this project. 21  https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ different-motivations-behind-green-and-ethicalinvestments-­i mplications-for-policy-making-andregulation-part-i/ 22  https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ schooling-and-work-participation-of-girls/ 23  a social system in which a married couple resides with or near the husband’s parents. 20 

5.5  What Could Be the Nature of Research in Universities with Specific Social Purposes?

Through its existence during the last 5 years, the University-Practice Connect has brought out nearly 300 articles. The link to these published articles were sent to nearly 4000 persons or organisations (which include both practitioners and academics). The readership varies. There are articles which are read by around 10,000 people. Readership increases slowly. Most articles reach more than 1000 readers within 6–7  months. Academics (not only from Azim Premji University but also from other institutes of higher education) and practitioners have contributed these articles. These materials are also used as learning materials for specific courses at the Azim Premji University. University-Practice Connect is a significant example of the nature of research outputs most aligned with the ideals of community-engaged scholarship, addressed in our chapter on community engagement. The process of information collection or field work for writing these articles is an important way of connecting research with practice. This is not structured as research though these can be viewed as case studies. It tries to understand the social problem that the practice/action attempts to address; the theoretical framework (or assumptions) behind the action; anecdotal or other kinds of evidence on the impact; identify the challenges and limitations; and think about the probable reasons for the successes and failures. It may identify the steps which may be needed to enhance the impact of action (based on a reading of the extant literature or the exposure to multiple actions of the same kind). One series of articles documented the practices of those teachers of government schools in India who take proactive steps to address the educational challenges of children from poorer and marginalised groups. These documents are used in the courses on education and development. Of late, one can see three kinds of developments as a follow up of the University-Practice-­ Connect. First, though the initiative was started by a couple of people, more and more academics of the university developed an interest in writing these reflective documents. Secondly, more and more practising organisations demand the creation of such reflective documents on their

87

actions. Thirdly, the relationship with the practising organisation does not end with the documentation. Some of these are developing into longer-term partnership in terms of developing training programs and consultations. It might be imagined that such development would be best promoted by institutions valuing the academic research that create these articles, in a similar way to its valuing articles published in peer reviewed journals (such authorship could be valued, for example, in job applications, applications for promotion and in annual reviews of academic performance) or in ways akin to the UK’s REF (with financial rewards accruing to impactful case studies) there are also arguments for supporting their creation in less-mechanistic ways. Mechanistic recognition may reduce the real value of these contributions. Academia as a profession should be based on intrinsic motivation; a major reward of this work could be the joy or happiness that comes from it.

5.5.2 Using Research Skills for Social Purposes There are situations where the research skills of academics are directly and immediately useful to the society at large. One such situation in India was during the COVID pandemic, when many migrant workers (who were involved in construction and other such activities in urban areas) lost their jobs and livelihood. Thousands of such migrant workers started walking hundreds of miles to their homes in rural India. It may be noted that public transportation was also affected during the initial periods of lock-down. There was a need to support them in different ways since they lacked enough food, access to transport and health facilities and did not have much savings with them. Many governmental agencies and non-governmental organisations (including philanthropic foundations) came forward to extend different kinds of support to such people. Collecting and compiling data on these workers and their needs in a usable manner so as to ensure that the required help reaches them effectively and timely were major challenges. A set of aca-

88

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

demics of the Azim Premji University were active in this regard. They collaborated with other non-­ ­ governmental organisations, put in place systems of data collection, and communicated timely with different organisations which were at the forefront in extending aid to these people.24 This example shows that certain research-based skills of academics can be utilised to meet social needs during certain emergency situations. The argument has been extended and supported internationally within the covid epidemic, with so many academics acting as science communicators, transferring academic knowledge to public knowledge. Such skills and their application need to be valued by those who make judgements about academic work. Contributing an article about research to a peer reviewed journal is clearly valued. Contributing an article on the same research, but designed for a different audience has an important social service, but is it valued as much by academia?

5.5.3 Research for Specific Social Needs: A Few Examples The researchers of the Azim Premji University have attempted to reorient research to meet specific social purposes. When an important legislation made in India to empower its tribal communities (the Forest Right Act – FRA) was not implemented in many parts of the country, its researchers used public consultations and case studies to understand the challenges of its implementation.25 The knowledge from this exercise was used to design certain steps to speed up the implementation of the law. This research has also contributed to the design of appropriate education programs to empower youth from

A report on the network can be seen in https://watson. brown.edu/southasia/news/2021/no-country-workers-­ latest-stranded-workers-action-network-report (Retrieved on 16 October, 2022). 25  These are documented in https://practiceconnect. azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/complete-and-effectiveimplementation-of-fra-in-kerala-­strategies-and-approaches/

tribal communities so that they demand for, and participate in, the implementation of the FRA. As noted earlier, many non-governmental organisations (including philanthropic foundations) carry out social actions without collecting appropriate benchmark data or without putting in place appropriate control (to address the attribution problem).26 However, this may work against a rigorous impact assessment of such actions. Moreover, there is a need to understand and think through possible ways of overcoming the challenges in the conduct of such social actions. This may require an academic inquiry which is a lot more focussed on the process of social actions. There are a number of cases where social scientists of the Azim Premji University have used their research and investigative skills to understand the process of social actions and suggest changes. Some of these are accepted by the project implementing organisations (Santhakumar and Mishra 2022). Organisations which are involved in social actions may need research skills even though these are not for creating publishable research articles in peer-reviewed journals. These skills should help these organisations to fine-tune their actions and processes and for the development and measurement of appropriate indicators of their impacts. There is a need for appropriately trained personnel for this purpose. The Azim Premji University is offering a post-graduate diploma course on ‘research for social action’27 which is aimed at such professionals. Similar developments in the social sciences are occurring in other countries too (see for example, Tolich et al. 2015).

24 

The researchers of the university-practice connect of the Azim Premji University realise it in most cases when they are invited to look at the work of a non-governmental organisation or philanthropic foundation. 27  https://azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/programmes/pgdresearch-for-social-action 26 

References

5.6 Conclusions Research is an important activity of conventional liberal universities. However, this research or its outputs may not be that appropriate to meet ­specific social purposes. The focus of research in conventional universities is the development of universally generalisable insights which can be published in international journals. Though such insights are useful to make changes in natural and physical systems, these may not be enough to make changes in social systems. The latter may require context-specific knowledge. The creation of such knowledge may not be the focus of research in conventional universities although developments that focus on research impact are relevant and of current intererst. Hence universities which focus on specific social purposes may require other strategies for research and knowledge generation. Some of the strategies which are in use in such universities are mentioned in this chapter. However, there are challenges in realising the full potential of these strategies. A deviation from conventional research may lead to the production of knowledge without adequate rigour and reproducibility. Hence the real challenge is in the generation of knowledge through a systematic and rigorous process on the one hand, and that is appropriate and useful towards specific social purposes on the other.

References Altbach PG (2009) Peripheries and centers: research universities in developing countries. Asia Pac Educ Rev 10(1):15–27 Altbach PG (2011) The past, present, and future of the research university. Econ Polit Wkly 46(16):65–73 Angelo D et al (2022) Learning (in) indigenous languages: common ground, diverse pathways. OECD education working papers, no. 278. OECD Publishing, Paris Ashenberg S, Shulamith L, Phillips NK (1988) The relationship between social work and labor unions: a history of strife and cooperation. J Sociol Soc Welf 15(1):105–118 Baron J (1985) Rationality and intelligence. Cambridge University Press, New York Beck, J. And Stolterman, E. (2016) Examining the types of knowledge claims made in design research, She Ji: J Des Econ Innovation, 2, 3, 199–214

89 Blaikie P (2000) Development, post-, anti-, and populist: a critical review. Environ Plan 32(6):1033–1050 Bowles P, Veltmeyer H (2020) Critical development studies and the study of globalization(s): introduction. Globalisation 17(8):1325–1334 Boyer CM, Lewis DR (1984) Faculty consulting: responsibility or promiscuity? J High Educ 55(5):637–659 Brogt E, Shephard K, Knewstubb B, Rogers TL (2020) Using SoTL to Foster a research approach to teaching and learning in higher education. In: Plews RC, Amos ML (eds) Advances in educational marketing, administration, and leadership. IGI Global, pp  143–160. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-­1-­7998-­2212-­7.ch008 Chavarro D, Tang P, Rafols I (2017) Why researchers publish in non-mainstream journals: training, knowledge bridging, and gap filling. Res Policy 46(9):1666–1680 Coffey D, Gupta A, Hathi P, Khurana N, Spears D, Srivastav N, Vyas S (2014) Revealed preference for open defecation: evidence from a new survey in rural North India. Econ Polit Wkly 49(38):43–55 David P (2005) Evolution and path dependence in economic ideas: past and present. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham Dell Rossi A, Hersch J (2020) Gender and the consulting academic economist. Econ Inq 58(3):1200–1216 Grey W (1986) A critique of deep ecology. J Appl Philos 3(2):211–216 Guba EG (1978) Toward a methodology of naturalistic inquiry in educational evaluation. UCLA Graduate School of Education, Los Angeles Guba EG, Lincoln YS (1994) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 105–117 Hamilton LC (2008) Who cares about polar regions? Results from a survey of U.S. public opinion. Arct Antarct Alp Res 40(4):671–678 Heckman JJ, Smith JA (1995) Assessing the case for social experiments. J Econ Perspect 9(2):85–110 Hoffmann N (2018) When are experiments corrupt? J Contemp Afr Stud 36(4):532–552. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02589001.2019.1579893 Klakurka JAC, Irwin B (2015) Consulting by academics: many forms, many opinions. Syst Cybern Inform 13(6):134–140 Kuhn TS (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago Kukull WA, Ganguli M (2012) Generalisability. Neurology 78(23):1886–1891 Lakotas I (1970) Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. In: Lakotas I, Musgrave A (eds) Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge University Press, London Lewin K (1951) Field theory in social science: selected theoretical papers. Harper & Row, New York Marginson S, Yang L (2021) Individual and collective outcomes of higher education: a comparison of Anglo American and Chinese approaches. Glob Soc Educ 20:1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2021.193 2436

90

5  Research in Universities and Its Connection with Social Purpose

Markus H, Kitayama S (1991) Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol Rev 98:224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0033-­295X.98.2.224 Masuda T, Nisbett RE (2001) Attending holistically versus analytically: comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. J Pers Soc Psychol 81(5):922– 934. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-­3514.81.5.922 Muller SM (2015) Causal interaction and external validity: obstacles to the policy relevance of randomized evaluations. World Bank Econ Rev 29(sup. 1):217–225 Myers G (1985) Texts as knowledge claims: the social construction of two biology articles. Soc Stud Sci 15(4):593–630 Nyong A, Adesina F, Elasha BO (2007) The value of indigenous knowledge in climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies in the African Sahel. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 12:787–797. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11027-­007-­9099-­0 Perkmann M, Walsh K (2008) Engaging the scholar: three types of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry. Res Policy 37(10):1884–1891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.07.009 Raygorodetsky G (2011) Why traditional knowledge holds the key to climate change. Retrieved from https://unu.edu/publications/articles/why-­traditional-­ knowledge-­holds-­the-­key-­to-­climate-­change.html REFa (2021) Research Excellence Framework, What is the REF.  Retrieved from https://www.ref.ac.uk/ about-­the-­ref/what-­is-­the-­ref/ REFb (2021) Impact case study database. Retrieved from https://results2021.ref.ac.uk/impact/ Reis R (1964) Social science and ideology. Soc Res 31(2):234–243 Saldaña J, Omasta M (2018) Qualitative research: analyzing life. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks Santhakumar V, Mishra SK (2022) Digital learning materials empower teachers and improve educational achievements; Gyanodaya project. Adani Foundation, Godda. Retrieved July 17, 2022 from https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/5491-­2/ Shiva V (2016) The violence of the green revolution: third world agriculture, ecology, and politics. The University of Kentucky Press, Lexington

Stewart IS, Hurth V, Sterling S (2022) Editorial: re-­ purposing universities for sustainable human Progress. Front Sustain 3:859393. https://doi.org/10.3389/ frsus.2022.859393 TEC (2022) Consultation 2, In Principle decisions and summary of feedback: Towards a more holistic understanding of research excellence. Retrieved from https:// www.tec.govt.nz/assets/Publications-­a nd-­o thers/ PBRF-­Publications/TEC-­In-­Principle-­Decisions-­and-­ Summary-­of-­Feedback-­on-­Research-­Definitions.pdf Tiokhin L, Hackman J, Munira S, Jasmin K, Hruschka D (2019) Generalizability is not optional: insights from a cross-cultural study of social discounting. R Soc Open Sci 6(2):181386. https://doi.org/10.1098/ rsos.181386 Tkachenko O, Ardichvili A (2020) Critical factors impacting interdisciplinary university research teams of small size. Team Perform Manag: An Int J 26(1/2):53–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-­07-­2019-­0068 Tolich M, Scarth B, Shephard K (2015) Teaching sociology students to become qualitative-researchers using an internship model of learner-support. J Soc Sci Educ 14(4). https://doi.org/10.2390/jsse-­v14-­i4-­1314 Trussell DE, Paterson S, Hebblethwaite S, Xing TM, Evans M (2017) Negotiating the complexities and risks of interdisciplinary qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods 16(1):1–10. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1609406917711351 UNESCO (n.d.) UNESCO guidelines on intercultural education. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ ark:/48223/pf0000147878 Watts D (2017) Should social science be more solution-­ oriented? Nat Hum Behav 1(0015):1–5. https://doi. org/10.1038/s41562-­016-­0015 World Bank (2015) Mind, society, and behaviour: world development report, 2015. World Bank, Washington, D.C. Xu X (2022) Epistemic diversity and cross-cultural comparative research: ontology, challenges, and outcomes. Glob Soc Educ 20(1):36–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 14767724.2021.1932438 Zhu Y, Zhang L, Jin F, Shihui F (2006) Neural basis of cultural influence on self-representation. NeuroImage 34(3):1310–1316

6

Community Engagement and Social Purpose

6.1 Introduction The introduction to this book made the point that higher education was actively involved in achieving social purposes and that, indeed, it was difficult to find an HE activity that did not have social purpose. Social purposes could be found in our teaching, our research, our community engagement and often in our commitments to being public intellectuals, or critic and conscience of society. The introduction to this chapter on community engagement must make a similar point, that just about all the activities you could possibly imagine higher education being involved in do concern, to some degree, elements of community engagement. Our students are drawn from our communities, either locally or from a distance. Our students return to our communities to undertake work and to develop their careers, and to contribute to social maintenance, or change. What we teach is often substantially influenced by the needs of our local communities albeit in disciplinary categories. How we teach often also is directly related to our communities. Service learning in particular is widely adopted in some countries, and many nations and institutions make significant use of communities to provide students with opportunities to practise their developing abilities, as internships, for example. And much of our research occurs with, within or for communities. Accordingly, this chapter will not struggle to find relevant things of interest

(although notably, much community engagement in the context of university research is addressed in our research chapter). And yet these matters are far from uncontested. For example, and for some academics, and for one author of this book in particular, some social purposes are more aligned to those sustainable development goals that have social justice at their core than others, and including all together makes the task of analysis more complex than it need be, and more focussed on institutional self-interest or academic independence than on, say, institutional responsibility. The extent to which institutions recruit students from disadvantaged backgrounds, for example. Many claim to do so, but relatively few choose this as a principal means to achieve social purpose and adapt their academic processes to this end. Incorporating this aim along with many others that may or may not align with it, creates opportunities for institutions to claim much, without being called to task to verify what they do or what they achieve. Service learning provides another contested activity. Many institutions choose this mode of tuition, but only some identify the approach as transformational with respect to the social purposes of the institution, and assess or evaluate its outcomes in this light. And some academics doubt the role of higher education in this respect, or the rights of higher education to seek such outcomes. (The views expressed by Fish 2008, are particularly powerful in this

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_6

91

6  Community Engagement and Social Purpose

92

context, and addressed later in this chapter). Differences in what institutions advocate for and how they act, or indeed how they understand what it is they espouse, are similarly debated concepts. More than 500 universities worldwide have signed the Talloires Declaration, for example, asserting that; We believe that higher education institutions exist to serve and strengthen the society of which they are part. Through the learning, values and commitment of faculty, staff and students, our institutions create social capital, preparing students to contribute positively to local, national and global communities. Universities have the responsibility to foster in faculty, staff and students a sense of social responsibility and a commitment to the social good, which, we believe, is central to the success of a democratic and just society. (University Leaders for a Sustainable Future 2015, np)

But precisely what “fostering a sense of social responsibility and a commitment to the social good” means in strict pedagogical, or design for learning, and assessment, terms is poorly defined. Strong arguments for universities to become engaged universities have been made in recent research-led publications (see as examples, Grant 2021, and Watson et al. 2011) but readers of either would be hard-pressed to find evaluated accounts of impacts on student learning outcomes. More on this later in the chapter. At this stage it is enough to suggest that much of the content of this book so far has been merely preparation for readers to tackle the complexity and divisiveness of higher-education agendas for their community engagement. This chapter has been significantly informed by scholarly work of the authors reported elsewhere as Santhakumar (2020), Santhakumar and Sriram (2020), Brown et al. (2016), Shephard et al. (2017, 2018a, b).

6.2 Service Learning, Internships, Placements and Field-Practice We should start with what is for many the core of community engagement, involving students in some way interacting with communities outside

of the university and being affected by the experience in ways related to some definable social purpose, often in the context of social justice, sustainability or social responsibility. For now, we must focus on learning, and stress that student learning is at the heart of this particular categorisation (leaving volunteering, for example, to another category to be considered below, on the basis that it focuses on something other than learning). One of the current authors (KS) maintains a folder on his computer for research articles about university programmes anywhere in the world that are designed to impact on student learning associated with the SDGs and ESD that might give some hope to the aspirations of readers of this book. All articles in this special folder describe not only the intentions and hopes for the programme, but also reasonable evaluative research capable of identifying real change, even transformation, in the students, and sufficient evidence of change to be indicative of something important happening. There are very few articles in this folder and, at present, all of them involve some form of community engagement in the broad categories of service learning, internships, placements and field-practice. Two examples involving students will suffice at this stage. Both sought to explore not the impact of a single iteration of the programme in question, but to amalgamate the perspectives of several cohorts. Probst et  al. (2019) describe a multinational annual programme that centres on Uganda but is based at the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences in Austria. The programme brings together “students from different countries and disciplines with a variety of stakeholders, the course’s objective was to enable participants to critically assess agri-food systems, to improve knowledge related to organic agriculture and to build skills in facilitating change (649)”. The programme is complex, involving several stages of face to face and eLearning activities, fieldwork, interactions with experts, application of participatory action research on farm sustainability, interactive presentations and significant community engagement.

6.2  Service Learning, Internships, Placements and Field-Practice

Evaluative research also involved a significant engagement by the researchers in research methodology; “Researchers conducted an online survey assessing participants’ background and sociodemographic characteristics, [the programme] as a transformative learning experience, and the variables for sustainability attitudes, skills and agency. (650)”. And although the researchers accept that “an ex post facto study based on self-reported perceptions has considerable limitations. (648)” the findings are remarkable. “The findings showed that the training course provided a transformative experience that positively predicted (1) environmental attitudes; (2) professional and personal competencies at graduation; (3) the feeling of being able to personally influence sustainability and the perception that one’s employer has an influence on sustainability. (648)”. To achieve this transformative experience for their students, the researchers emphasise the importance of students engaging in real-world sustainability challenges. As the researchers themselves suggest; “By showing that transformative university learning experiences can contribute to sustainability attitudes, skills, and agency, the findings support the case for transdisciplinary course designs rooted in real-world sustainability challenges. (648)”. Readers of this account are left in no doubt about the potential efficacy of this form of pedagogy on the cognitive and affective attributes of those involved. Such programmes promise the possibility of higher-education-mediated social change, if they could be run at scale. Bieluch and colleagues from Dartmouth College in the USA (Bieluch et al. 2021) describe another community-engaged pedagogical activity that appears to have a pronounced impact on its participants. Their research explored perceived cognitive and affective changes in alumni who had previously attended Dartmouth College’s Environmental Studies Africa Foreign Study Program. It is important to note that the programme involved students in community-­ engaged research working with communities rather than on or for communities. This analysis suggests that the programme creates both cognitive and affective learning outcomes and high-

93

lights alumni’s perspectives that the experiences enhanced their appreciation for reflection and introspection, and capacity to engage with complexity. Authors suggest; “students’ ethical reasoning and self-reflection are a fundamental part of growing in their personal responsibility to create positive impact through engaged research on the program and through personal actions in the future.” (1479). Of interest here is not the possibility of a direct relationship between an educational experience and society’s aspirations for the SDGs, but rather preparing students to cope with the demands of ethical reasoning in a complex social environment. One other example of a community-engaged activity that has been sufficiently researched to create optimism for universities’ contribution to the SDGs relates to a different category of learners; school teachers engaged in professional development at university. New Zealand’s government has made it clear to its 8 universities that they are to seek equity of engagement and achievement in higher education for its Pacifica population. This was described in detail in Chap. 2. This is all the more difficult if New Zealand’s schools fail to adequately prepare Pacifica students for university entrance. As described by the researchers; “The aim of the initiative is: to provide teachers from schools with significant numbers of Pasifika students with the experience of living in another culture where the first language is not their own; to develop in those teachers an appreciation of challenges children from Pasifika cultures face in coping in an education system based on cultural values which are not theirs; and to develop in those teachers a capacity and willingness to apply what they have learned to their own teaching practice.” (Allen et al. 2009, 47). In essence, the project takes 10 teachers to Samoa for two weeks, to be immersed in family and village life in a culture different from their own. Our interests focus on the cognitive and affective outcomes explicit within the objective that teachers develop both capacity (essentially cognitive skills) and willingness (essentially affective attributes) to apply what they have learned to their future teaching practice. The research was based on the experiences of five teachers explored

6  Community Engagement and Social Purpose

94

through group interviews, individual journals and individual evaluative surveys. Research was qualitative, leading to insightful interpretations of what individuals experienced and what their future intentions might be. On this basis, researchers concluded; “For the participants, cultural immersion opened up new and deeper ways of understanding and ‘knowing’ Samoan children in New Zealand classrooms. It offered the teachers a cultural context in which to place their students. As a result the teachers felt more confident about the possibility of making changes in their own teaching practice and of working collectively at the school and community levels to meet the needs of their Pasifika students.” (59) Perhaps confidence about the possibility of change is different from willingness to change, but even so this research certainly suggests that experiential learning within communities can potentially be transformational with respect to the SDGs. It is worth noting that some excellent guides to such forms of higher education have been produced. Perhaps those from the USA’s Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching are best known. This group sponsors The Carnegie Foundation’s Elective Classification for Community Engagement, a way for colleges and universities in the USA to gain recognition for institutionalising community engagement, and on the way, learn much about what is possible, and expected, in these forms of learner-support. Community engagement describes collaboration between institutions of higher education and their larger communities (local, regional/state, national, global) for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity. The purpose of community engagement is the partnership of college and university knowledge and resources with those of the public and private sectors to enrich scholarship, research, and creative activity; enhance curriculum, teaching, and learning; prepare educated, engaged citizens; strengthen democratic values and civic responsibility; address critical societal issues; and contribute to the public good.1

https://carnegieelectiveclassifications.org/the-2024elective-classification-for-community-engagement/ 1 

Many other universities around the world routinely use community-based approaches to contribute to student learning in the context of their social purposes. Although often not researched, or evaluated, to the same degree, such institutions are mindful of the potential power of such educational opportunities and their limitations. We provide some examples from Azim Premji University, in India, in the following section.

6.3 Examples and Experience from India One of the current authors is a strong advocate for field-practice as a core element of the learning programme of students, particularly those enrolled in institutions with specific social purposes, as a contribution to these students’ learning, or developing, a social orientation (or as described by O’Connor et al. (2011) “a range of qualities and capabilities which will equip them to contribute as citizens in uncertain futures (110)”. Examples are provided below, with a brief commentary on some perceived limitations.

6.3.1 Internships Many universities including conventional ones have adopted internships as part of their education programs. Internships are extensively used for the education of social workers. In a study of Tata Institute of Social Sciences, almost all former students interviewed talked about the usefulness of internships in understanding social reality (or that in industrial production units) and the way these helped them in their careers (Santhakumar 2020). This is true of another institute in India which aimed at creating rural managers (Santhakumar and Sriram 2020). In addition to internships, there can be field practice components which can give students an exposure to social reality. Though this is also attempted by many universities, the real challenge is the integration of class-room teaching with these opportunities of field practice. Such an integration

6.3  Examples and Experience from India

would mean that the courses have an adequate intellectual (not only practical) space for the practice. The practice can be a window to understand and apply the academic insights. A number of courses at the Azim Premji University aim at (and achieve to some extent) such an integration by including field practice as a component of particular programmes. Interactions with children in government schools (which cater for poor and marginalised groups) is an important form of field practice not only for students of education but also for students of development. They learn how class, caste, and gender work as axes of marginalisation in education through this field exposure.

95

academics of universities with specific social purposes to create theory-informed accounts is also problematic. A compulsion on the part of management of the university may be resisted by these academics who maintain a degree of academic autonomy (which is shaped by the liberal universities) even in universities with specific social purposes. When Azim Premji University started functioning, there was not enough clarity on whether the ‘reflective practitioners whom it wanted to create’ would get jobs or not. There was a mere perception that the need for such people existed, and that the graduates of the university would get such jobs. There were serious efforts on the part of the university to contact organisations which have such practitioners and which may be in need 6.3.2 Developing Links Between of recruiting our graduates. These efforts were University Courses and Field successful. There was a consistent increase in the Practice number of organisations which recruit the graduates of the university. Most of the positions for 2 The University-Practice Connect of the Azim which these organisations recruit are practitioPremji University enables conventional academ- ners in the domain of education and developics (in subjects like economics and sociology) to ment. Recent experience suggests that the number develop theoretically-informed accounts or nar- of job positions which are available is more than ratives of the practices of different kinds of social the number of students who seek such jobs. The organisations. These narratives, when used in the fact that these organisations recruit almost all stuclassroom, can provide insights on the usefulness dents who want a job (who are trained to be a of theory in understanding the challenges of reflective practitioner) is an important indicator organisations, and also for a reflective assessment of the effectiveness of Azim Premji University in of theory based on the practice of organisations. terms of its specific social purpose. For example, microeconomics can be connected However, there is a notable minority of these to the functioning of micro-finance institutions students (and this could be around 35 percent) (which are an important player in developing who graduate from post-graduate programs but countries). Exposure to this theory-informed may not seek the job of a practitioner. They may appraisal of practice can connect the class-room want more conventional jobs or that of a teaching with the insights from internships. researcher possibly in a metropolitan city, or may be looking for salaries which are higher than those available for the entry-level positions as an 6.3.3 Successes and Limitations education/development practitioner in India. Some of these students may pursue higher levels There are challenges in developing such theory-­ of education like PhD (even though the Master’s informed accounts of practice to be used by stu- Program in education and development is not dents. If such accounts are developed by designed to enable its graduates to pursue a docpractitioner-teachers, they may not use the toral degree). This indicates a mismatch between insights of theory. Encouraging conventional the aspirations of this minority of post-graduate students, and the social purpose of the university. 2  https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in It appears that universities which aim at a specific

96

social purpose may attract a subset of students whose job aspirations may not be connected to that purpose. This could be due to the public perceptions of universities regarding their reputation, the cost of education and so on. When the university provides subsidised education with a social purpose, such subsidies may attract a set of students who may be interested in the subsidy but not the social purpose. The screening out of these students may not be an easy task for these universities. Coercive measures which compel all students to take up specific jobs may not be desirable in contexts where a certain level of intrinsic motivation is needed for the adequate performance in such jobs.

6.4 Educational Theorising About Community-Engagement On balance the academic literature on service learning and related activities paints a picture of community-engaged experiential-learning approaches with great potential to contribute to the social purpose of universities, but with many limitations. O’Connor et al. (2011), for example, reviewed literature on learning outcomes associated with community engagement. While emphasising its potential this review also stressed that; “More effective monitoring, evaluating and recording of engagement activities and their impacts are required. (110)” echoing a great deal of previous concern about making assumptions that relate community engagement with outcomes such as enhanced social responsibility. It is probably not enough to provide our students with opportunities for community-engaged learning. University teachers will need to commit their own time to researching the impacts of their design for learning, on student learning. As much learning within this context is affective in nature, it seems likely that conventional assignments and examinations will not address this need. Accordingly, to make progress in this highly contested area of higher education activity, we may benefit from some educational theorising about what happens when academics and their students

6  Community Engagement and Social Purpose

engage with communities, with student learning in mind. The following sections address scholarship, co-construction of knowledge, analysis of how university people conceive their community engagement, and an approach to categorise, and to value, different facets of community engagement and its objectives.

6.4.1 Co-construction of Knowledge and the Boundaries of Disciplinary Knowledge To some degree, this chapter is also about boundaries and who controls them. Historically, academics have controlled what and how they teach within their universities, and to a degree what they research. Perhaps professions have had some input into teaching, and certainly those with money have some control over funding research, but lines between what is and is not higher education and between disciplines have been drawn by academics. Community engagement poses significant challenges in these regards. Communities ask awkward questions that do not necessarily fit neatly within disciplines. Communities have needs that are not necessarily clearly delineated as pertaining to higher education or not. If a professor delivers a public lecture, academia is most certainly in charge, albeit whilst providing a service to the community. But if the university sends its students into the community to learn from and within the community, and draws support from the community, albeit hopefully always with the community benefiting as well, there is a sense in which academia is losing some control and in which the boundaries are less clear. Service learning, internships, placements and field-practice are highly contested topics in higher education as, in particular, they challenge us to re-imagine what disciplinary knowledge is, or might be. We should first explore the nature of co-­ construction of knowledge, as it is central to the issues inherent to higher education’s third mission. The term was first popularised in the context of Freire’s pedagogy of the oppressed, as a challenge to what by most accounts had been a

6.4  Educational Theorising About Community-Engagement

bottom line for university teaching. Teachers have knowledge, learners have less, and the task of higher education is to deliver, transmit or inculcate knowledge to these learners (Freire referred to this as a banking model of teaching). Learners are in deficit and passive consumers, and teachers are systematically differentiated from them, by qualities that define who they are (as in possession of qualifications, status and power). Freire reconceptualised teachers as those who were responsible for bringing issues to the attention of learners, and to support them as they grappled with problems. Freire differentiated between teachers and learners by how they acted, not by inherent qualities or power differentials (see Oliver 2015, for a good account of knowledge co-construction). By collaboratively grappling with issues of inequality and injustice, learners and teachers work together to construct shared knowledge. Freire suggested that knowledge is being constructed by teachers and by learners through a transformative process of reflection on experiences. This conceptualisation of co-construction has been developed further in particular in problem-based learning pedagogies and in many forms of research-based learning. There are strong links to constructivism (arguing that all who learn have to construct their own knowledge as their own mental map) and to social constructivism (arguing that social knowledge always precedes individual knowledge). In the context of academia’s three missions, as soon as co-construction of knowledge becomes a possibility, academics lose power, and control, and may worry about their identity, position and authority. One question is paramount in this context. If we (academics) let our students out into the community, or encourage our academics to get out and about themselves, what do we hope will happen? Do we expect our students to learn something from our communities, something that we cannot teach them ourselves? Might we hope that our communities will learn something from our academics, as public intellectuals, or as ‘critic and conscience of society’, that they could not learn themselves? If we open our doors to adult and continuing education non-traditional learn-

97

ers, will they benefit from our expertise in the ways that we expect our more traditional students to? Where do deficit models of learning, ideals of co-construction of knowledge, and Boyer’s aspirations for community-engaged scholarship fit our third mission?

6.4.2 How University People Conceptualise Their CE Activities Before we look at particular examples of community engaged scholarship in our universities and at the nature of knowledge construction that develops as a consequence of community engaged scholarship, we would do well to understand how university teachers conceptualise community engagement. It is one thing to explore the theoretical opportunities for community engagement but quite another to fully understand their operation and limitations. One study, by Brown et  al. (2016) based in New Zealand, undertook a phenomenographic study to explore how a diverse group of teachers, researchers and university administrators conceptualised their involvement in community-­ engaged learning and teaching (CELT). This study identified three conceptually different ways in which university people conceived their community engagement (as giving back, as advocacy for a discipline, as reciprocal learning). Giving back and advocacy for a discipline place university people in positions of superiority over community members. Authors expressed great concern about assumptions implicit within higher education communication about community engagement and the consequences of such diverse ways of thinking about third-mission relationships. It appears natural and reasonable for university people to adopt superior roles to those of community people. Superiority is embedded within the history of universities, exclusionary practices of recruitment and validation of teachers and of students, and in many cases expectations of earning and social status. But it is

6  Community Engagement and Social Purpose

98

similarly natural and reasonable to imagine this stance standing in the way of the forms of knowledge co-construction and community-engaged scholarship described elsewhere in this chapter. A great deal of enquiry into community engagement confirms that university people should be supported to approach community engagement as reciprocal learning rather than adopting approaches that render community partners in more passive roles. In many situations we appear to be a long way from this ideal.

6.4.3 Service Learning, Community Service, and Changing the World in Your Own Time One of the most powerful analyses of university community engagement, with a focus on student learning, came as a public discourse involving a community engaged scholar, Dan Butin, and a traditional academic, Stanley Fish. Fish’s 2008 book “Save the world on your own time” was a strong message to university academics to do their job, rather than to use their job and their influence on students, to achieve societal benefits such as moral and civic responsibility. Their job, according to Fish, was (with respect to teaching); College and university teachers can (legitimately) do two things: (1) introduce students to bodies of knowledge and traditions of inquiry that had not previously been part of their experience; and (2) equip those same students with the analytical skills-of argument, statistical modeling, laboratory procedure-that will enable them to move confidently within those traditions and to engage in independent research after a course is over. (p.13)

This came at a time when, particularly in the USA, higher education was under pressure from conservatives that it was becoming too liberal and tending to influence students accordingly, perhaps particularly with programmes that force students to experience social injustice in the guise of service learning. Politicisation of the classroom was a significant worry at this time. In a review of Fish’s book (Butin 2008), Butin responded by analysing a range of community-engaged learning and teach-

ing activities using technical, cultural, political and antifoundational arguments, or as Butin describes them, as lenses through which the nature of community engagement could be better seen. Through a technical lens, enabling students to experience, by engaging with a community outside the university, aspects of what they have learned more theoretically, is surely educationally positive by any, or at least most, accounts. Similarly, if these experiences enable students to reflect on what they have learned and to consider if their own assumptions and attitudes are sufficient to support what they have learned, they provide the antifoundational attributes of good learning environments supported by educational researchers since John Dewey promoted them. Things get more problematic, at least for a book set on exploring the social purposes of universities, when we use Butin’s political and cultural lenses. A cultural lens might question social purposes such as promoting tolerance, responsibility and consideration as these may be culturally dependent in some way and, if so, questions which particular cultural norms are to be promoted. Similarly, a political lens may question notions of equity and highlight the danger of promoting any particular political ideology, be it democracy, communism, socialism or something else. Butin concludes that Fish’s analysis, far from damaging community engaged pedagogy, provides the means for community-engaged scholars to better analyse their own activities and to proactively develop stronger community-engaged pedagogical practices. For example, exposing students to difficult situations and similar antifoundational practices is only pedagogically sound if students are supported to learn from them, for example using critical reflection. Students need to be taught how to reflect critically, and be given time and support to do so. Service learning is designed with these things in mind, whereas volunteering and community service might not be. Community engagement that is designed to change student’s views, or perspectives, or to generate particular social orientations involving particular notions of fairness, equity and responsibility, may struggle to emerge unscathed from an analysis using all four lenses.

6.4  Educational Theorising About Community-Engagement

One aspect of community-engaged student learning that does survive theoretical analysis is critical reflection. Although it is not reasonable to attempt a full definition and analysis of this outcome in this chapter, much analysis in the community engagement literature and in the more generic higher educational literature supports the idea that developing students’ skills and tendencies, or dispositions, to critically reflect on their experiences, community-engaged or otherwise, is fundamentally important to a higher education experience. There appears little doubt that community-­engagement provides students with important experiences on which to reflect. Much then depends on the abilities of higher education institutions and their teachers to support students to reflect critically on these experiences. There are strong links to Schon’s work on reflective practitioners’ tendencies to reflect on action and to reflect in action (Schön 1983), to Schon and Argyris’s single loop and double loop learning (Argyris 1993) and to Mezirow’s transformative learning (Mezirow 1991). Although many pedagogical approaches to support critical reflection are available, the DEAL model of Ash and Clayton is perhaps typical. Students are to be supported as they attempt to describe and examine their experiences and then to articulate what they have learned from these experiences (Ash and Clayton 2009). There are of course strong links between critical reflection, critical thinking and the pursuit of intellectual independence described in Chap. 7 of this book. Community-engaged experiences are often antifoundational, forcing students to question their personal mindsets, assumptions and understanding of the world. But, unless students are supported to reflect critically on these experiences, or to think critically about them, there is a very real danger that students will emerge from these experiences with their assumptions and mindsets reinforced rather than challenged and potentially changed. This danger has been theorised to a degree and community-engaged practitioners nowadays make use of such theory to design community-engaged student experiences that will have desirable educational outcomes (see for example, Conner and Erickson 2017,

99

with a focus on contact theory “Contact Theory, also called the contact hypothesis, was introduced and developed by social psychologists to understand and evaluate the various conditions under which face-to-face contact would promote greater personal and social understanding between members of different groups” 55–56). Of course, it is this design for learning with particular educational outcomes, such as reducing prejudice, or changing perspectives, or changing attitudes, that is most problematic from a traditional higher education perspective and that Butin’s four lenses are designed to clarify. It is difficult to distil these complex pedagogical phenomena into discrete principles that may or may not be credible or effective or desirable. Their complexity denies simple interpretation, but also provides a rationale for the confusion maintained by institutional policies, strategies, missions and visions. The University of Canterbury (NZ) strategy to use community-­ engaged pedagogy “to develop in those teachers a capacity and willingness to apply what they have learned to their own teaching practice.” (Allen et al. 2009, 47) in the context of teaching Pasifika minority students in New Zealand, described earlier in this chapter, clearly relates strongly to that institution’s social purpose, to that nation’s legislated guidelines for its higher education institutions, and appears to work; but it likely will struggle to survive close scrutiny through Butin’s cultural and political lenses. On the other hand, Dartmouth’s programme, also described earlier in this chapter (Bieluch et  al. 2021) with its apparent ability to enhance graduates’ appreciation for reflection and introspection, and capacity to engage with complexity, probably would not. Similarly, Azim Premji University’s fears that universities which aim at a specific social purpose may attract a subset of students whose job aspirations may not be connected to that purpose, could be interpreted as an institution accepting that although it has a particular social purpose, the extent to which this social purpose should be used to change its students is limited, practically, and by design. Perhaps the example from BOKU, Austria and Uganda is most powerful for helping us to

100

understand how higher education might choose to operate in this context (Probst et  al. 2019). Fundamentally this example of community engaged pedagogy may rest on the assertion that students should engage in real-world sustainability challenges. How, precisely, these challenges impact on them must surely depend on the degree to which these students are supported to actually engage, and participate, in an active learning sense, on the extent to which they are supported to critically reflect on their experiences, and on what their prior experiences may have been. Whether being engaged in real-world sustainability challenges actually provides a transformative experience will surely depend on the students involved as much as on the pedagogy used. By this analysis, the key question for the institution involved, for the students and their teachers, and indeed for those who wish to align the roles and responsibilities of higher education to the sustainable development goals, is essentially the same question posed by Shephard (2008). Higher education is sufficiently powerful to change the values, attitudes, dispositions and likely future behaviours of its students (in sum, their affective attributes) if it chooses to and has sufficient resources to do so. Community-­engaged pedagogy is likely higher education’s most powerful tool. Shephard (2008) explored how the Krathwohl and Bloom hierarchy of affective learning outcomes (Krathwohl et al. 1973) could be used by university teachers and asked university teachers to consider how far up this hierarchy of intended outcomes to aim. Most teachers would probably find it acceptable to encourage students to be willing to listen, to read, to acquire information, and to discuss environmental issues with others and so to create opportunities for students to formulate their own views on the issues based on their experience and learning. Fewer teachers might be prepared to require students to develop particular attitudes and to behave in particular ways, often in relation to the stated values of their future profession, and to assess them on their ability, and willingness, to do so. Shephard asks university teachers to reflect on their aims, and the assumptions about their role in doing so.

6  Community Engagement and Social Purpose

Higher education institutions have the conceptual tools to make rational decisions about their social purposes if they wish to, and to communicate these clearly. They have the pedagogical tools to put their aspirations to affect, if they choose to use them (and can afford to). They have the research and evaluative tools necessary to research their own practices and confirm to all who will listen the extent to which they achieve their social purpose. Our current international confusion about social purpose in these contexts has no basis in theoretical limitation. Confusion is clearly manifested by leaders and participants with other policy outcomes in mind.

6.4.4 Scholarship as a Framework to Understand University Teachers’ Community Engagement We might still benefit from a framework within which the complexities of community engagement, from an academic teacher’s perspective, can be managed. One such structure was provided by Boyer, late in the last century, as scholarship. Boyer (1990) addressed the long-standing debate on the fundamental roles of higher education. He suggested that some higher education institutions were founded on the principle that higher education must visibly serve the interests of the wider community. Serving the interests of communities has become known as higher education’s third mission (with teaching and research vying for first and second missions). It is possible that his focus was most apparent in the USA but Boyer claims that everywhere in the late twentieth century this academic focus on service was both reduced and changed to primarily address campus-based activities such as sitting on academic committees. Boyer emphasised that service, however focused, “is serious demanding work requiring the rigour and accountability traditionally associated with research activities” (Boyer 1990, 22). Boyer extended his analysis beyond service to address the broader roles of academics, or scholars, as scholarship. Boyer (1990, 15) claimed that scholarship used to refer

6.4  Educational Theorising About Community-Engagement

“to a variety of creative work carried on in a variety of places, and its integrity was measured by the ability to think, communicate, and learn.” But by 1990, Boyer went on to suggest that being scholarly had come to unduly emphasise some notion of rank in universities, and in particular being engaged in research and publication. Boyer’s work (1990) ‘Scholarship Reconsidered’ was designed to address this aberration and resulted in a broadly accepted categorisation of scholarship as four scholarships; of discovery, of integration, of application (more recently redefined as of engagement) and of teaching. Throughout this work Boyer emphasises that scholarship activities, be they teaching, research or other, must be tied directly to “one special field of knowledge and relate to and flow directly out of this professional activity” (22). Boyer was pressed to reconsider scholarship in 1996 and in particular to identify how it’s quality could be judged or assessed. For all four scholarships, Boyer identified 4 sources of evidence (self, peer, students, and clients) and for each, six criteria. Boyer asks ‘did the scholar’: have clearly stated goals; use well-defined and appropriate procedures; use adequate resources and use these effectively; communicating effectively to others; create significant results; and engage in reflective critique. Boyer’s point was that these matters come fairly naturally within the scholarly activity of research (and link easily to ideas of writing research applications, gaining research funding, designing research and creating research outputs, publications etc.). The challenge is to take the same level of scholarly demand and apply to, for example, teaching or community engagement. For these to be scholarly activities they need to be framed with the same scholarly demands as research. Hutchings and Shulman (1999) further developed Boyer’s approaches with a focus on teaching. They emphasised that scholarship in the context of teaching requires that: the work must be made public; it must be available for peer review and critique according to accepted standards; and it must be able to be reproduced and built on by other scholars. Extending the argument to all scholarships, and in line with Boyer’s original

101

standards, scholars need to build their scholarly practices on what has come before, and not simply make it up as they personally develop. This discourse describes a system where academics research their own scholarly practices using many of the same skills and approaches used for their scholarly research. Similarly, many aspects of learning to engage with the community are, for a scholarly academic, inseparable from learning to research. Boyer’s scholarships provide a great framework within which we can describe, discuss and make judgements about the aims, application and quality of higher education’s community engagement. We should now focus on the scholarship of engagement and address this theme with these sources of evidence and criteria for judgement. A term that is nowadays widely applied is ‘community-­engaged scholarship’. (CES) This might include any form of scholarly activity that involves communities (hence research, integration and teaching in addition to engagement/ application). But Gelmon et al. (2013) emphasise “Community engagement in and of itself is not necessarily scholarship. That term is reserved for research and scholarship that uses a scholarly approach, is grounded in work that has come before, and is documented through products that can be disseminated, and subjected to critique by peers from a variety of contexts.” (Gelmon et al. 2013). Importantly in this way of looking at community engagement, peers are no longer necessarily other academics; they are more likely to be community partners. Dissemination of results is no longer and necessarily to be in peer -reviewed journals and academic conferences; it is more likely to be in community newsletters or in public meetings. And for community-engaged scholarship to be valued alongside research scholarship in higher education, these means of dissemination and these new peers need to be valued by the academic community. Community partners in the context of community-engaged scholarship are not necessarily clients and they certainly are not research subjects or audiences for academia’s other scholarly roles. They are partners. And partners have a say in how things operate, what questions are asked, what aims are sought and

102

what answers are deemed satisfactory. These are awesome challenges for those in higher education’s ivory towers to contemplate. So, using this framework it is clear that university teachers who provide lectures within the community and for the community may be involved in community-engagement or service, perhaps relating to their own scholarly research (that is itself grounded in what has come before, documented through products that can be disseminated and subjected to critique by academic peers) but this should not be confused with community-­engaged scholarship (or to scholarly activities pertaining to the scholarship of engagement) unless it is indeed grounded in what has come before, documented through products that can be disseminated, and subjected to critique by peers from a variety of contexts and all in the context of community engagement. Gelmon et  al. emphasises that the scholarly work of academics in CES cannot be measured in the same ways as scholarly research. Modes of publication, audiences for publication, the nature of decision-­making, measures of impact are all relevant to the ways in which CES is valued in academia. For these authors, and indeed from many involved in community-engaged scholarly activity, “community and academic partners are peers and co-­producers of knowledge.” (61). Yet many of the processes extant in higher education are built around the needs and understanding of the academic community. Making meaningful relationships with communities in a ‘scholarship of engagement’ sense appears to be profoundly difficult for higher education. As Gelmon et al. say “Much of the resistance to CES is grounded in the culture and traditions of the academy, home of an intellectual elite who are separate from the community by virtue of their advanced education” (63). What might this have to do with higher education’s social purpose? If we focus on the idea that higher education should serve the interests of society, as its third mission, we may find it desirable to separate out academics’: scholarly research role, which clearly needs to inform communities; scholarly teaching role, which should feel responsible for supporting community learning as well as student learning; from their schol-

6  Community Engagement and Social Purpose

arly community-engaged role, which may (perhaps should) be working in partnership with communities at least in part for the benefit of those communities. These tasks are clearly related, but Boyer’s notions of scholarship allow some degree of differentiation in what would otherwise be highly complex and interacting. Community-engaged learning clearly involves aspects of pedagogy and community engagement, but for both, institutions could strive for these activities to be scholarly. Fundamental to scholarship is an ongoing responsibility to research our practices. Simply creating the possibility for change though community-engaged pedagogy is not enough.

6.5 Social Change that Does Not Overtly Benefit from Engagement with Universities, But Perhaps Should Of course, communities attend to their own needs whether universities engage with them or not. This book highlights engagement between universities and communities (community engagement) only because the book centres itself on the roles and responsibilities of universities, not of communities. Addressing how local, national and international communities attend to their own affairs is not really part of this book, unless, perhaps, if communities find themselves disappointed by the efforts of their universities and so forced to go it alone. Surely then this book does need to be interested. Shephard (2020) argues that higher education has given itself, or accepted, an impossibly long to-do list that cannot possibly be achieved in full. And that society is quite forgiving of this as long as some elements on the list are addressed. Community engagement is so multifaceted and complex that it impinges on many of higher education’s accepted tasks in complex and probably mutually exclusive ways. We should not be surprised that some ­communities feel failed by higher education’s engagement or by the nature of engagement that higher education apparently considers acceptable.

References

Even so, some academics may be surprised at the extent to which communities are managing to implement social change without their help. They learn this, of course, primarily through the efforts of academics who choose societies and communities as topics worthy of their research. We should not ignore the irony of this situation, but still celebrate the availability of such academic analysis. The importance of informal education in India was addressed in Chap. 2, with particular reference to the People’s Science Movements (PSMs). Readers may also be interested in how leaders from poor and marginalised communities are developed and supported by groups and institutions that sit outside India’s higher education sector (Santhakumar and Das Antoni Arokianathan 2022).

References Allen P, Leali’ie’e Tufulasi Taleni, Robertson J (2009) “In Order to Teach You, I Must Know You.” The Pasifika initiative: a professional development project for teachers. NZ J Educ Stud 44(2):47–62 Argyris C (1993) Knowledge for action: a guides to overcoming barriers to organizational change. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco Ash SL, Clayton PH (2009) Generating, deepening, and documenting learning: the power of critical reflection in applied learning. J Appl Learning High Educ 1(1):25–48 Bieluch KH, Sclafani A, Bolger DT, Cox M (2021) Emergent learning outcomes from a complex learning landscape. Environ Educ Res 27(10):1467–1486. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1947985 Boyer EL (1990) Scholarship reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton. Retrieved from https://depts.washington.edu/gs630/Spring/Boyer.pdf Boyer EL (1996) From the scholarship reconsidered to scholarship assessed. Quest 48(2):129–139. https:// doi.org/10.1080/00336297.1996.10484184 Brown K, Shephard K, Warren D, Hesson G, Fleming J (2016) Using phenomenography to build an understanding of how university people conceptualise their community-engaged activities. High Educ Res Dev 35(4):643–657. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.20 15.1137880 Butin DW (2008) Saving the university on his own time: Stanley Fish, service-learning, and knowledge legitimation in the academy. Mich J Community Serv Learning 2008(Fall):62–69

103 Conner J, Erickson J (2017) When does service-learning work? Contact theory and service-learning courses in higher education. Mich J Community Serv Learning 2017(Spring):53–65 Fish S (2008) Save the world on your own time. Oxford University Press, New York Gelmon SB, Jordan C, Seifer SD (2013) Community-­ engaged scholarship in the academy: an action agenda. Change Mag High Learning 45(4):58–66. https://doi. org/10.1080/00091383.2013.806202 Grant J (2021) The new power university: the social purpose of higher education in the 21st century. Pearson, London Hutchings P, Shulman LS (1999) The scholarship of teaching: new elaborations, new developments. Change Mag High Learning 31(5):10–15 Krathwohl DR, Bloom BS, Bertram BM (1973) Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals. Handbook II: affective domain. David McKay, New York Mezirow J (1991) Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco O’Connor KM, Lynch K, Owen D (2011) Student-­ community engagement and the development of graduate attributes. Educ Train 53(2/3):100–115. https:// doi.org/10.1108/00400911111115654 Oliver M (2015) Perspectives on co-creating knowledge with learners. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255660760_Perspectives_on_ cocreating_knowledge_with_learners#fullTextFileCo ntent Probst L, Bardach L, Kamusingize D, Templer N, Ogwali H, Owamani A, Mulumba L, Onwonga R, Adugna BT (2019) A transformative university learning experience contributes to sustainability attitudes, skills and agency. J Clean Prod 232:648–656. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.395 Santhakumar V (2020) From an Institute of social work to a University of Social Sciences: the evolution of TISS.  Retrieved from https:// practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/from-­ an-­institute-­of-­social-­work-­to-­a-­university-­of-­social-­ sciences-­the-­evolution-­of-­tiss/ Santhakumar V, Das Antoni Arokianathan S (2022) Creating leaders from poor and marginalised social groups: grassroots leadership development programme, CORO, Mumbai (Part 1). Retrieved from https://practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ creating-­leaders-­from-­poor-­and-­marginalised-­social-­ groups-­part-­1/ Santhakumar V, Sriram MS (2020) Transition of Institute of Rural Management and what it means for Azim Premji University. Retrieved from https:// practiceconnect.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/ transition-­o f-­i nstitute-­o f-­r ural-­m anagement-­a nd-­ what-­it-­means-­for-­azim-­premji-­university/ Schön D (1983) The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Basic Books, New York Shephard K (2008) Higher education for sustainability: seeking affective learning outcomes.

104

6  Community Engagement and Social Purpose

Int J Sustain High Educ 9(1):87–98. https://doi. ­scholarship. Tert Educ Manag 24(1):83–94. https:// org/10.1108/14676370810842201 doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2017.1395904 Shephard K (2020) Higher education for sustainabil- Shephard K, Brown K, Guiney T, Deaker L, Hesson ity: seeking intellectual independence in Aotearoa G (2018b) Exploring the use of social media by New Zealand. Springer, Singapore. https://doi. community-­ engaged university people. Innov Educ org/10.1007/978-981-15-1940-6 Teach Int:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.20 Shephard K, Brown K, Guiney T (2017) Researching 18.1557069 the professional-development needs of community-­ University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (2015) engaged scholars in a New Zealand University. Talloires Declaration. Retrieved from http://ulsf.org/ Sustainability 9(7):1249. https://doi.org/10.3390/ talloires-­declaration/ su9071249 Watson D, Hollister R, Stroud SE, Babcock E (2011) The Shephard K, Brown K, Guiney T, Deaker L (2018a) engaged university, 0th edn. Routledge. https://doi. Valuing and evaluating community-engaged org/10.4324/9780203818763

7

Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives and Consequences

7.1 Introduction At this stage of the book readers will be familiar with the essential conundrum that underlies the task of realising the social purposes of universities. The idea of a university establishes the essential nature of a social purpose, whether this relates to pushing forwards the boundaries of science for the benefit of society in pragmatic economic terms or as more high-minded objectives such as individual and social enlightenment, but also implies some direct influence on the values and behaviours of societies, as envisioned most recently by the sustainable development goals. Our universities respond by promising much in relation to things beyond the employment prospects of our students and the economic implications of our research. Our universities promise, as examples, to address gender, race and class biases through our teaching and to lead all towards environmental and social justice by teaching, and by role modelling appropriate behaviours on our campuses. Clearly, universities are quite good at educating or training graduates for particular forms of employment or for particular professions. A significant body of research confirms our abilities to instil traits of competitive individualism that may serve our graduates well as they compete in the worlds of business, commerce and politics (Brennan and Naidoo 2008). We certainly hope that university research will support the technical fixes and improvements that will

allow us to continue living on our badly-damaged planet. But, drawing from the examples developed in earlier chapters, widening participation is still ‘work in progress’ in UK universities, participation in New Zealand’s universities is still highly skewed by ethnicity, and gender inequality, the caste system and regional disparities of health and wealth still persist in populations served by Indian higher education. If societal changes are underway, it seems possible that they are happening despite the efforts of our universities, not because of them. Perhaps expecting more is simply unreasonable, given the complexity of our higher educational, social and political systems and, particularly, given our universities’ reluctance to research our own practices or even research the extent to which we achieve what we promise. While it might appear to be simply over-­ optimistic for universities to promise much, to be very busy doing all sorts of things, but fail to measure, monitor, assess, evaluate or research the extent to which they achieve what they have promised, and so forgivable, we should be at least prepared to accept an alternative explanation for slow progress. As suggested by Bourdieu, education may be rather better at reproducing the social traits of the societies that sponsor it, than changing these. It appears possible that universities have little appetite for change, impose few internal drivers for change and have limited disposition towards researching their own practices that

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_7

105

106

7  Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives…

might helpfully monitor glimmers of change in the making! And because universities exist in most countries as autonomous institutions, with prescribed academic freedoms, external drivers for change struggle to have impact. Although governments have some power, in particular over university funding, they are hamstrung by the democratic will of societies. People do not vote to be poor or marginalised, but nor do they vote, necessarily, for social justice, particularly on a global scale. So, in the context of social change, what is the point of universities? Are universities good at anything that could be remotely helpful in achieving those elements of the sustainable development goals that have social justice at their heart? Although it is to be hoped that the answer is positive, in multiple ways as described in this book, this chapter focuses on just one; universities claim to be good at developing graduates’ capacity and propensity to think, often described as critical thinking, and so at developing their intellectual independence. We should imagine the power of an internationally-connected cohort of university graduates able and willing to think for themselves, and wonder what they would think about higher education’s propensity to reproduce the prejudices of previous generations. We should ask if choosing to think for oneself might not be the same as choosing to think in one’s own interests, and wonder if it takes someone skilled and disposed to think critically to notice the difference, or to distinguish differential encouragement for collectivism, liberalism and individualism within our HEIs, or to recognise the progress of populist rhetoric and fake news on our campuses. We should ask ourselves if promoting intellectual independence might be the most important role for our universities in the context of our social purpose. Whilst preparing to write this chapter, I was reading Yuval Noah Harari’s ‘21 lessons for the twenty-first century’. It is not a joyous book to read but I think it is insightful. Harari (2018) explores the extent of ignorance amongst human populations and builds on Sloman and Fernbach’s suggestion of the ‘knowledge illusion’ (Sloman and Fernbach 2017), suggesting that individually

we know surprisingly little about how the world works. (Later in this chapter we introduce ‘epistemic authority’ as part of an analysis of this trait). Harari goes on to critique the liberal mission of developing rational individuals, and questions this approach as a force for good. Harari suggests that “most human decisions are based on emotional reactions and heuristic shortcuts rather than on rational analysis (Harari 2018, 222)”. Harari extends doubts about the importance of education’s influence on individuals by suggesting that humans rarely think for themselves but rather tend to think in groups, and that “What gave Homo sapiens an edge over all other animals and turned us into the masters of the planet was not our individual rationality but our unparalleled ability to think together in large groups (222)”. While not applied in particular to universities, Harari’s analysis certainly helps explain the failings of universities in contributing to social change. It would be difficult to imagine a better mechanism for developing and encouraging social ‘group-think’ and ‘heuristic shortcuts’ than taking a significant proportion of the most powerful, well-connected young people in a nation and subjecting them to three or four years of lectures to tell them how to understand the world, with examinations to ensure that they got it right. Although, and as Harari suggests, the current state of affairs can hardly be described as all bad [“… trusting in the knowledge of others has worked extremely well for homo sapiens (223)”] we have to hope that universities in the future can do better. Our task is not to prove Harari wrong, for surely he is not, but to find some way of changing universities so that they can have a different impact on future generations. One possible starting point could be to work with what all universities tell the world that they already cherish and accomplish (developing intellectual independence or teaching critical thinking, or both) but ask them to do the job well, to monitor, assess, evaluate, measure or research how well they do it, and to tell us all how they are getting on. It would be great if our universities were also interested in what their graduates choose to do with their intellectual independence, particularly in

7.2  What Are Critical Thinking and Intellectual Independence, in Broad Terms?

the context of the social purpose of universities, and tell us all about that too. So, what are intellectual independence and critical thinking, how do we teach these things, what might we expect graduates to do with them and how is this relevant to the social purposes of universities? Much in this chapter draws from a recent analysis of these questions in the context of universities in New Zealand (Shephard 2022), where developing intellectual independence is the legislated principal aim of universities.

7.2 What Are Critical Thinking and Intellectual Independence, in Broad Terms? The nature of intellectual independence has been debated in international literature for more than a century (Oliver and Nichols 2001). Even so, New Zealand’s Education and Training Act (2020) stipulates that the principal aim of its universities should be to develop intellectual independence (Section 268, 2, d, I, a. New Zealand Legislation 2020. The same stipulation appeared in the 1989 Education Act). One academic definition in the context of intellectual independence as an educational goal is “To be intellectually independent is to assess, on one’s own, the soundness of the justification proposed for a knowledge claim.” (Aikenhead 1990, 132). In more common usage, intellectually-independent people choose to think for themselves. An important aspect of intellectual independence as an educational objective is that simply knowing about intellectual independence or knowing how to be intellectually independent cannot be a satisfactory conclusion to its educational development. Intellectually independence manifests itself as thought processes that people are able and willing to perform albeit, we assume, to varying degrees. In addition, and at least in the context of New Zealand, developing intellectual independence cannot be an optional extra, or something to fit in if there is room in the curriculum. If it is the principal aim, it has some jurisdiction over what else can be in the curriculum. It would be inappropriate, for example, to

107

attempt to teach something that negates or undermines the intellectual independence of those being taught. We cannot be teaching students what to think, no matter how heartfelt by those doing the teaching, at the same time as teaching them to think independently. We should not imagine intellectual independence in isolation from the many developments in our understanding of human thinking and learning that occurred during the last century. In 1987 Scriven and Paul proposed the existence of a number of universal intellectual values that should underpin thinking and the teaching of thinking (Scriven and Paul 1987). Their proposal was built on prior analyses of the concept of values in the context of education (see for example, Scriven 1966), with particular reference to critical thinking and what might guide the beliefs and actions of individuals; Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. (Scriven and Paul 1987, np)

There is much in common between the thinking processes (conceptualizing, applying, analysing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating) described by Scriven & Paul and the elements of cognitive learning described earlier that century by Bloom and colleagues (Bloom 1956). In this sense, critical thinking skills are taught, and to a degree assessed, generally in all forms of undergraduate education that make links to Bloom’s Taxonomy through intended learning outcomes and constructive alignment (between intended outcomes, teaching and learning activities, and assessment). Similarly, Scriven and Paul’s list of where information was to be gathered from or generated by (observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication) is consistent with the developing interest in the 80s of combinations of experience, reflection and cognition. Kolb’s experiential learning theory, emphasising ­cyclical

108

7  Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives…

links between experiences, reflection, conceptualisation and experimentation, for example, was published in 1984 (Kolb 1984). Just a few years later, Mezirow emphasised that combinations of experience, reflection and critical thinking are necessary to help adults “discover a need to acquire new perspectives in order to gain a more complete understanding of changing events.” (Mezirow 1991, 3), giving rise to educational strategies such as ‘perspective transformation’ that combine cognitive development with affective, values-based educational aspirations. Somewhat earlier, Bloom’s cognitive hierarchy was joined by an affective equivalent focussed on learning and thinking, in the affective domain (Krathwohl et  al. 1964). Also in the 1980s, another group of interested academics was discussing the details of critical thinking to create a ‘statement of expert consensus’. Facione summarised the conclusions of this expert group (Facione 1990) to describe what skills critical thinking comprises, with similarities to key stages in Bloom’s cognitive hierarchy. Within this framework, Facione and the expert panel developed an equally important and much longer list of affective dispositions that underpin these cognitive manifestations of critical thinking, in two sections involving ‘Approaches to life and living in general’ and ‘Approaches to specific issues, questions or problems.’ Notably, Facione’s dispositions to critical thinking have elements in common with Scriven and Paul’s ‘universal intellectual values’. ‘Fairness’ was reconceptualised as being ‘fair-minded in appraising reasoning’; ‘sound evidence’ was greatly expanded to include, as examples, ‘diligence in seeking relevant information’, ‘persistence though difficulties are encountered’ and ‘willingness to reconsider and revise views where honest reflection suggests that change is warranted’. Nowadays, critical thinking is generally assumed to comprise combinations of cognitive and affective attributes and to be fundamental to the intellectual task of choosing to think for oneself. Most universities in most parts of the world claim to teach their students to think critically, but the

challenges involved in this enterprise, even with a focus on skills alone, are emphasised by Loyalka et al. (2021). Brookfield (2012) argues that critical thinking belongs conceptually to more than one philosophical tradition. Brookfield identifies analytic philosophy and logic, hypothetico- deductive method, pragmatism, psychoanalysis and critical theory as contributory and suggests that all five traditions have elements in common, none are mutually exclusive, and indeed may work best when they interact. Critical theory may have a particularly distinctive contribution to our interests in people choosing to think for themselves, and the relationship between beliefs, thinking and actions. Brookfield suggests that “The whole point of critical thinking is to take informed action” (Brookfield 2012, 12) and there are strong conceptual links here to Scriven and Paul’s (1987) highlighting of critical thinking as a “guide to beliefs and actions” (1987, np) emphasising that the behavioural product of critical thinking cannot be prescribed but arises or is guided from within, as a consequence of the cognitive and affective critical thinking efforts of the thinker. More recently critical theorists have expanded these ideas to make links between critical-­ thinking, critical-self and critical-being and to consider the nature of a university curriculum in these contexts. As described by Barnett (2015); Unless we are able to supply an account of how these different critical tasks can be held together, the danger looms that we might produce students who are adept at critically evaluating, say, literary texts or other works of humanistic culture in one way, but who adopt quite different powers of critical evaluation in relation to the world. (63).

As we approach an academic understanding of intellectual independence in the context of learning and teaching, we should remain cognisant in particular of Scriven and Paul’s emphasis on critical thinking as a “guide to beliefs and actions” (Scriven and Paul 1987, np), of Facione’s critical thinking skills and dispositions (Facione 1990), and of Brookfield’s “The whole point of critical

7.3  How Realistic Is it to Expect our Graduates to Always Think for themselves?

thinking is to take informed action” (Brookfield 2012, 12). Shephard (2020) provides an account of how higher education institutions are teaching and assessing critical thinking skills, and also introduces some of the issues involved in teaching and assessing the far more challenging dispositions that underpin critical thinking skills.

7.3 How Realistic Is it to Expect our Graduates to Always Think for themselves? This is a challenging question to address and it has occupied the minds of educational philosophers for an extended period. Hardwig (1985, 335), for example, suggests that the list of things I believe, though I have no evidence for the truth of them, is, if not infinite, virtually endless … though I can readily imagine what I would have to do to obtain the evidence that would support any one of my beliefs, I cannot imagine being able to do this for all of my beliefs.

Hardwig (1985, 1991) asserts that rationality sometimes involves deference to epistemic authority, or the opinion of experts. In this way, the model of the rational person who always thinks for themselves is an unrealistic ideal. In their subsequent analysis of Hardwig’s assertions, in the context of science and science education (as indicative of broader areas of expertise), Gaon and Norris (2001) suggested that even experts rely on those more knowledgeable than themselves to build, for example, communal scientific knowledge; and that although rational intellectual independence of both experts and non-experts might be impossible, there are grounds to assert that critical assessment of science is still possible for non-experts. They argue that such critical assessment is possible because the development of science itself is based on norms, beliefs and values that are contestable by non-scientists. They assert. … the trust the layperson places in experts is no different in-kind from the trust experts themselves place in expertise. In claiming that a belief is rationally grounded, both non-scientists and scientists

109

mobilise the ideal assumption that the chain of epistemological authority has an ultimate end that is scientifically justified. (Gaon and Norris 2001, 199)

Such analyses are of great importance to science education in particular, and to education in general. They provide insight into the nature of intellectual independence as conceptualised within the discipline of education, and to a degree more widely, and emphasise the educational purpose of what Gaon and Norris identify as ‘content-­ transcendent modes of inquiry’. “What such content-­transcendent modes of inquiry can do, however, is expose some of the cultural, moral, social, political and prudential judgements that underlie expert knowledge, and that can potentially destabilise it from within. (201)”. Applied to the beliefs and actions of students in our universities, acceptance of some degree of epistemic authority held by university teachers may be inevitable, but intellectually independent students will still wish to question the modes of enquiry, integrity and motives that underpin this authority. As suggested by Shephard (2015, 43); … critical thinking also empowers students to decode the deliberate or unintended companion or hidden meanings associated with knowledge in higher education and to identify the interplay between teacher and what is being taught.

It may be reasonable to suggest that the critical assessments that Gaon and Norris have in mind, expressed as questions, have much in common with what Scriven and Paul (1987) describe as Universal Intellectual Values. For example, as asserted by Gaon and Norris (2001, 199), in the context of science education; Although only an expert can appraise the methodological validity of evidential claims, the non-­ expert can, and indeed should, always ask such questions as: Does this scientific belief embody or support any particular social hierarchies such as those based on race, on gender, or on class? ……

Compare this with Scriven and Paul’s (1987), np) hopes for “clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness” as an ideal underpinning for critical thinking.

110

7  Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives…

7.4 Is Intellectual Independence Context, or Discipline, Specific? Clearly students cannot be taught all of the possible permutations and processes involved in developing sound arguments and assessing the evidence in all situations. A better aim may be to develop skills in logic and in identifying and allocating particular circumstances to defined parameters, underpinned by defined value-based dispositions, to solve logical challenges. Even in predominantly social settings, and in the domain of critical theory, there are still definable skills and dispositions involved in hunting assumptions and in identifying alternative explanations for observations, and these can be taught. The Brookfield approach for teaching for critical thinking, not unlike the transformational teaching approaches of Mezirow, emphasises the task of identifying and testing the assumptions that underpin claims and assertions, eliminating those that can be, and exploring alternative ways of seeing those that cannot. Nevertheless, and as argued by Brookfield (2012, 21) “Assumptions are rarely right or wrong - they are contextually appropriate.” In this context at least, teaching students how to think critically in particular situations is highly dependent on the circumstances involved. Following on from this line of enquiry, is the suggestion that only disciplines can provide the extensive training and competence sufficient to require, develop and sustain the intellectual independence explored in this chapter. The argument integrates much thought relating to multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary engagement. The idea of a university degree may be formulated on the prospect that graduates will possess a deep, coherent and extensive knowledge of at least one discipline and that the more generalisable graduate attributes, such as critical thinking or intellectual independence, generally develop and exist in the context of this particular discipline. Unless our graduate is equally proficient in two or more disciplines, combining more than one discipline to a lesser level could be interpreted as something less than that possible from

one. The argument also relates to the possibility of diverse epistemic positions on the nature of knowledge. Repko et  al. (2014), in promoting the advantages of identifying multiple disciplinary perspectives on any particular issue, argued strongly for critical pluralism (rather than say relativism) as an optimal epistemic position when confronted by issues that have multiple or even conflicting disciplinary perspectives to be said about them. … if you take a sophisticated epistemic position, that of critical pluralism, you will see the multiple and conflicting perspectives as partial understandings of the subject under study. You will also realise that what is needed is not another partial understanding or uninformed opinion but an understanding that takes into account the subject’s complexity and that responds to the scholarship of disciplinary experts. (Repko et al. 2014, 143)

It may be concluded from this analysis that intellectually-­independent graduates will always seek to determine to their own satisfaction the trustworthiness of claims made by experts, and that the further they stray from their own particular discipline, the greater will be their need to depend on the epistemic authority of experts. Even so, highlighting intellectual independence as a principal aim of universities in the context of learning and teaching appears, so far, to be rational.

7.5 What Educational Objectives Might Be Incompatible with Seeking Intellectual Independence as the Principal Aim of Universities? Student-centred approaches to teaching emphasise inclusion of students in designing the curriculum, teaching approaches and means of assessment. Student-centred approaches focus on what the students do and need to support their learning, rather than on what teachers expect of them. A great deal of educational research in the broad context of the scholarship of teaching and learning supports a claim that more traditional

7.6  Concerns About the Development of Intellectual Independence as the Principal Aim of Universities

teacher-centred approaches to direct student learning may be less successful in developing the thinking skills and autonomy of our students than more modern student-centred approaches. (See O’Neill and McMahon 2005 for a broad analysis of student-centredness). Pedagogical approaches that are essentially teacher-centred likely get in the way of developing our students’ intellectual independence. In these contexts, professional education is a particular version of disciplinary teaching, with intended outcomes closely aligned with the knowledge, skills and values professed by particular professions. Professional education also poses concerns about potentially limiting the intellectual independence of students by imposing a particular interpretation of their chosen profession’s mode of operation on their developing minds (Shephard and Egan 2018). Paradoxically, given the theme of this book, civics provides a related discourse, emphasising the roles and responsibilities of universities as agents for social change, in prescribing what students should learn and how their behaviour might need to change if it does not already conform to key elements of civically-minded behaviours, such as particular interpretations of social responsibility. The Association of American Colleges and Universities (2018) suggests “Both educators and employers agree that personal and social responsibility should be core elements of a 21st century college education if our world is to thrive (np)”. Sustainability, encompassing both environmental and social justice, has become a commonly espoused mission for higher education around the world, generally with a focus on what students should learn during their tenure at university. More than 900 higher education institutions internationally have joined the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education, whose mission is to “To inspire and catalyze higher education to lead the global sustainability transformation” (AASHE 2021, np). These broad civic missions, while widely appreciated, do situate universities as agents of change not only with respect to what our students know or are able to do, but also in relation to their mindsets, worldviews, agency and what they may be willing to do (Shephard 2022). Some theorists

111

have gone further, recruiting critical thinking skills to integrate critical thought with moral integrity and responsible citizenship within a pedagogy focused on moral development (see for example, Paul 2000). Depending on how these missions are imagined and enacted by university teachers, they may seek to limit the independence of our students’ intellectual development by advancing another aim, that while important, appears to be not entirely compatible with emphasising our students’ intellectual independence.

7.6 Concerns About the Development of Intellectual Independence as the Principal Aim of Universities Even if we were able to harness the skills and willingness of university people to develop the intellectual independence of our students, so that they leave our institutions able and willing to think for themselves, to a degree, is this really the right thing to do? So far in this chapter the implicit assumption has been that intellectual independence is likely to be a good thing in the context of developing the social purposes of universities. But, rather than simply promoting it we need to critique the idea, using lines of enquiry that may not be fully supportive of the development of intellectual independence as the principal aim of universities. What if intellectually independent young people choose to use their intellectual independence to further their own interests rather than social and environmental justice. Perhaps they will, but what is the alternative? Might it be better to not teach them not to think deeply, critically and independently so that we (university teachers), their parents, society, politicians can continue to seek to influence them as has occurred in generations past? Might we hope to keep them thinking in something other than deep, critical and independent ways, so that we can selectively influence them only with the good messages that we fervently believe will lead to social and

112

7  Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives…

e­ nvironmental justice? Is that a good plan? Of course, we shall have to be careful that the students kept in this blissful state, of thinking in something other than deep critical and independent ways, will not be exposed to influence from those with bad messages. Given these students’ limited capacity to think for themselves, they may struggle to distinguish our good messages from others’ bad messages. This does not appear to be a good plan. For now, we should stick with developing the next generation’s intellectual independence and consider how this aim might be affected by social paradigms that our graduates are likely to encounter.

7.6.1 Liberalism It seems incontrovertible that there are links between intellectual independence, as envisioned in this chapter, and liberalism, which in general usage suggests that societies should be made up of autonomous individuals capable of making moral choices. Liberal pluralism accepts that these autonomous individuals may have different moral codes, but nonetheless need to get on with each other. As individual expressions of autonomy cannot suppress the autonomy of others, there have to be compromises. Liberalism promotes freedom of speech, toleration of diverse religious beliefs and democracy. It should be argued that intellectually independent citizens will use their skills and dispositions to think critically about their own autonomy, and that of others, and be in a good position to maintain the values of liberal society. Critical-thinking dispositions of being ‘fair-minded in appraising reasoning’, ‘diligence in seeking relevant information’ and ‘willingness to reconsider and revise views where honest reflection suggests that change is warranted’ appear to be ideal attributes for those who inhabit liberal societies, or hope to. Critics of liberalism suggest that this economic philosophy has developed into neoliberalism, leading to increasing economic inequality, market-based decision-making and dominance of the promotion of the self-interested individual as

the leading driving force within economic planning. Imagined in this way, the last thing that we might wish to promote is the intellectual independence of every self-interested citizen. Many do not think in this way. Fukuyama, a significant proponent of liberalism in the 1970s, accepts that liberalism in the 2020s is not as popular as it was in the last century, but suggests that this is because it has been distorted to extremes by both left- and right-wing politics (Fukuyama 2022). Fukuyama calls for a revival of moderate liberalism. Moderate liberal values combined with intellectual independence of citizens who are not entirely self- interested appears to still have some value.

7.6.2 Individualism Individualism is a social theory favouring freedom of action for individuals over state control. In recent years, adoption of liberal values by the ultra-right-wing has forced discourses about the autonomous individual to extend beyond traditional liberalism to extreme forms of empowering individuals. Unfortunately, the rhetoric of populist politicians and right-wing extremists can easily overlap with universities’ devotion to intellectual independence unless care is taken to understand where these ideas stem from and how they become distorted. For educational theorists, the origins of educational intellectual-­ independence stem from the writing of Dewey, perhaps the most ‘democratic’ of educational theorists, as he found fault with an educational system that encouraged acceptance of information rather than critical examination of it (Oliver and Nichols 2001). Recent trends in higher education pedagogy emphasise ‘student-centred earning and teaching’, often with a focus on individuals and an inevitable link to individualism. Some authors question the extent to which such a focus is desirable in the context of education for sustainability and social justice (Komatsu et  al. 2021). Other researchers highlight social class differences in how students react to university teachers who focus on individual achievement and encourage independence, rather than

7.6  Concerns About the Development of Intellectual Independence as the Principal Aim of Universities

i­ nterdependence (Stephens et  al. 2012). Competitive individualism may be even more insidious than individualism itself, for it could be said to underpin most interpretations of capitalism and is a key feature of neoliberalism. Meritocracy is a related idea, proposing that the wealth and power of people should be dependent on how much effort they make to achieve it in a market-based economy and how much talent they bring to bear on their personal advancement. Dispositions to think critically, and the skills to use them well, should enable our graduates to successfully interpret the powerful but highly biased perspectives and messages characterised as greenwashing, or astroturfing, and sometimes funded by right-wing philanthropy. Such messages appear to many to be reasonable, making it challenging to understand the difference between, for example, populist and liberal perspectives. Critical thinking will also help our graduates to distinguish the ideas inherent to democracy from those of meritocracy, to relate both to the sustainable development goals and to consider the plight of those living in inherited poverty. Higher education’s response could be to expose our students to diverse experiences, including at least some that may be promoted by those whose opinions and methods are not acceptable to most in higher education, to provide opportunities on which developing dispositions of ‘fair-mindedness’, ‘diligence’ and ‘willingness to reconsider’ can practise.

7.6.3 Cultural and Linguistic Relativism While intellectual independence is clearly a good thing in some cultures it would be an example of ethnocentrism to assume that this is the case in all cultures. The value of independence in any respect could be both culturally and linguistically relative. Clearly not all cultures value the independence of individuals equally. Our task here is to identify where these factors need to be considered, and to use this consideration to explore whether or not developing intellectual independence is universally appropriate in achieving

113

those social purposes that have universal application. We shall need to be particularly careful in this analysis to identify differences, if and where they exist, between intellectual independence itself, its manifestation as independent action, or agency, and self-interest. Being able to think for oneself, choosing to think for oneself, and choosing to act in one’s own interests are likely to be different things, but these differences may be accessible to us only through thinking critically about them, in the context of lines of inquiry belonging to several disciplines. We also need to be mindful that the social purposes that have occupied our discourse in previous chapters are likely to be themselves culturally relative. Although there are some highly informative analyses of related considerations in the literature, in general they are not particularly applied to questions of intellectual independence. Marginson and Yang (2022), for example, undertook a broadly-based analysis of differences between Chinese and Anglo-American educational approaches and outcomes, particularly in the context of differentiating individual from collective outcomes. They emphasise, for example, differences between individuality and different expressions of individualism, emphasising that although individual development is important in Chinese traditions, this development is focused on that individual’s need to contribute to society. Although Marginson & Yang go on to explore more recent developments in these contexts, and to develop transpositional (integrated Anglo-­ American + Chinese) outcomes of higher education, there is a sense in which the cultural differences explored relate more to the independent behaviour of individuals, than they do to the development of the individuals themselves. That intellectual autonomy is a key feature of critical thinking in Chinese sociocultural contexts has been clearly detailed by Chen (2017) and although critical thinking in English is challenging to define in detail, one Mandarin equivalent, Pi Pan Si Wei, is readily translated to critical thinking. Importantly, the Confucian ethic of continuous self-improvement suggests no lesser expectation of critical capability in Chinese cultural traditions than in ‘the west’. What

114

7  Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives…

i­ndividuals do with their intellectual independence, and the factors that they bring to bear in reaching decisions on how to behave, is certainly a different matter. Differentiating individual from collective educational outcomes has also been considered from a Pasifika1 cultural perspective by Matapo and McFall-McCaffery (2022), in the context of an exploration to “decolonise the academy through radical political and social change (129)” in New Zealand. These authors comment on limits to the educational success of Pasifika students at university and critique Ministry of Education policies that have focused on equity provision to drive Pasifika success. These authors claim that “Neoliberalism, or neoliberal capitalism, is a dominant economic and political ideology within higher education in Aotearoa New Zealand (127)” and that “The notion of academic success prescribes a particular subjectivity of the student or academic, which is often aligned with liberal and neoliberal ‘traits’ that are not always conducive to Pasifika ways of being and knowing (122)”. Matapo & McFall-McCaffery describe a “‘vā knowledge ecology’ that stands, in all its complexities, in contrast to the neoliberal ‘knowledge economy’, provides opportunity to ground Pacific indigenous knowledge systems within the institution (129).” Va is too complex to be addressed in detail here but, in the words of Matapo & McFall-McCaffery, and in the context of education; An education system that is centred upon building a knowledge economy contradicts the value and position of knowledge within Pacific philosophies. Pacific indigenous knowledge systems are collective in nature; therefore, the production of knowledge and its value are ontologically tied to the collective. There is no Eurocentric humanist-­ centred ‘self’ within a vā knowledge ecology, (134).

Over emphasis on individuals in conventional universities is also a concern for Māori in Aotearoa New Zealand. A recent treatise on culA term used principally in Aotearoa New Zealand as a collective reference to Pacific Peoples who have made Aotearoa New Zealand their home. 1 

turally responsive education with respect to Māori (Rātima et  al. 2022) emphasises Whanaungatanga, as a process of establishing and maintaining relationships, and its links to assessment. Establishing and maintaining whanaungatanga requires tertiary educators to provide students with activities that enable them to learn together. …. When individualistic assessments are the only option available, for each and every assessment task, this may hinder the progress of many Māori students and not support them to reach their potential. (Rātima et al. 2022, 30)

Internationally there is expanding interest in indigenous knowledge systems, the ways in which ‘western knowledge systems’ have marginalised them, and in matters of colonisation, and decolonisation. Stephens (2000) provides one helpful analysis of how traditional native knowledge systems differ from ‘western science’, but also emphasises overlaps between them. In the context of intellectual independence, Stephens suggests, for example, that western science endorses scepticism, while traditional native knowledge systems incorporate trust for inherited wisdom. Although these may appear to be mutually exclusive, Stephens identifies traits that these systems have in-common, including open-­ mindedness, and bodies of knowledge that are stable, but nonetheless subject to modification and verification through repetition. Although the above paragraphs established cultural expectations for collaborative learning and addressed particular ethnicities, evidence suggests that a diversity of factors may lead to advantages and disadvantages in learning. Increasing interest in the USA on First Generation students (those whose parents did not go to college or university), many of whom are also socioeconomically disadvantaged, does suggest a mismatch exists between the expectations of universities (focused on independent study) and the expectation of such students (with expectations of collaboration and interdependence). Research by Stephens et al. (2012) identifies an unseen disadvantage of working-class students, in comparison with the dominant middle-class students, in these respects.

7.6  Concerns About the Development of Intellectual Independence as the Principal Aim of Universities

7.6.4 Positioning Self-Interest, Competitive Individualism, Cooperation and Intellectual Independence It is important to explore how ‘self’, competition, interdependence and independence (intellectual or otherwise) align. Although few, if any, universities claim to be based economically or politically on neoliberal ideology, it would be difficult not to conclude from even a cursory examination that they are indeed focussed on individual learning, rather than collective learning. Most forms of assessment (or evaluation in a USA context), for example, address the learning of individuals. Even so, the idea that university assessment should be competitive, or norm-referenced, has been strongly contested by many in higher education (Biggs and Tang 2007) and institutions nowadays are generally encouraged to use criterion-based assessment more often than not (so that all may earn an A+ if they achieve at an A+ level). Similarly, the idea that learning should be nowadays an individual activity is also problematic. Social constructivism is a theory of learning, developed by Vygotsky in the 1960s and central to many universities’ ways of working, that emphasises social, linguistic and cultural underpinning of learning. Collaborative learning is a core feature of many universities nowadays, as is learning to work in teams as a preparation for employment; hopefully increasingly so. Collaborative learning is also key to the development of at least some forms of critical thinking. Brookfield (2012) emphasises that learning to think critically is a social process. The key question underlined by these matters, however, is whether collaboration might be undermined by the intellectual independence of the individuals involved. As suggested above, being able to think for oneself, choosing to think for oneself, and choosing to act in one’s own interests are likely to be different things but the differences, if they exist, are by no means proven. That working and learning collaboratively depends on individuals bringing their best mental endeavours to the collective appears to be rational but is still a hypothesis. That learning to think

115

critically, and so independently, is best undertaken as a socially constructed process is perhaps more than a hypothesis, but still subject to contestation. Intellectual independence, as exemplified by critical thinking, may be a key asset to competitive individualism, but maybe no less so to collaborative learning. While educators have debated ideas around individual and collaborative learning and teaching, other social scientists have been addressing the relationship between social structures and both individual and group agency in determining outcomes (see Annala et  al. 2021, for a recent review). Explorations variously address the capacity of individuals to decide for themselves how to act, the capacity of groups to do so, and the role of social structures in enabling or constraining actions. Notably, individuals and groups may not be fully aware of the social structures and cultural systems that constrain or enable their actions. For many, and as described elsewhere in this book, a key role of the critical thinking that intellectually independent people are able to manifest is to fully understand what enables and limits their individual, or group-directed, agency. Intellectual independence, as the key enabler of universities achieving their social purpose through the free will of their graduates, has at least one more hurdle to overcome. Cultural differences in a social science context are not exclusively the product of ethnic or genetic differences. Sustainability, or nowadays the attainment of the sustainable development goals (SDGs), has become something that defines alternative worldviews of subgroups of societies, that in some senses transcends ethnic differences, but in other senses, is defined by them. Education has been called upon by the United Nations to achieve SDG #4 (Quality Education) and to contribute to the achievement of the 16 others. And yet, for some, education, perhaps particularly ‘western education’, with its veneration for the ‘autonomous thinking individual’ as an ideal, is as much part of the problem as it is a contributor to the solution. As the late Gregory Bateson warns, our survival depends upon a radical transformation of the dominant patterns of thinking in the West. These

116

7  Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives… p­ atterns are widely shared, passed along in everyday conversations, and encoded in the built culture. The institutions that give special legitimacy to these patterns of thinking are the public schools and universities. (Bowers 2010, 1)

Bateson questions many aspects of what might be identified as conventional, western, educational ideas, but perhaps is particularly well known for his attempt to provide a novel conceptualisation of learning; one that highlights learning levels as capacity to change or adapt rather than as discrete expressions of ability, but also one that highlights limitations of conventional education systems. Bateson’s work is perhaps most easily engaged with via Bowers, but the following paragraphs represents the current author’s best attempt to link Bateson’s levels of learning to our current analysis of the place of intellectual independence. In this analysis, Level 0 is the product of a student writing notes during a lecture (defined by Bateson as a specificity of response). If the student re-reads the notes and is able to answer questions on the factual elements of the lecture, the student could be said to exhibit Level 1 Learning (defined as a change in the specificity of response). If the student reflects on the notes, and reconceptualises them with respect to something that was not itself in the lecture, such as the student’s own understanding or relationship with wider experiences) the student could be said to be engaged in Level 11 learning (defined as a change in the process of Learning 1). Educational theory might suggest that double loop learning, metacognition and reflection on experience are all attributes, or consequences, of learning at Level 11, and that a student learning at Level 11 is also learning to learn. Most aspirations for learning at universities aim for Level 11, but Bateson argues that such learning is often highly recursive (self-­ validating) and remarkably continent on language that is essentially metaphorical in nature, and so reproduces interpretative and moral frameworks historically embedded in particular cultures. If the student goes on to question the interpretive and moral premises upon which Level 11 learning is itself based, to draw alternative conclusions and to adapt behaviour in the

light of such analysis, the student would be engaged in Level 111 learning (defined as change in the process of Learning 11). This analysis suggests that intellectual independence is a prerequisite for Level 111 learning, but on its own is not sufficient to achieve learning at this level. It enables Level 111 learning but does not guarantee it. I am reminded of (Brookfield 2012, 12) “The whole point of critical thinking is to take informed action”. Critical thinking skills and dispositions may get us so far, but it is what people do with their intellectual independence that counts.

7.6.5 Does the Pursuit of Specific Social Purpose Require a Compromise on Intellectual Independence? Continuing the line of inquiry established in the introduction to this chapter, and building on arguments so far in this chapter about what might support or work against the development of our students’ intellectual independence, we may feel compelled to wonder if promoting intellectual independence is compatible with achieving social purposes. In seeking learning compatible with gender, class and caste equity, or in overcoming educational disadvantage associated with socioeconomic disadvantage, might our students be better occupied learning more directly-useful knowledge of direct relevance to their disadvantaged position? Might learning to be independent get in the way, or perhaps, some might think, might their independence lead them to come to the wrong conclusions altogether and so be too risky for institutions that aim for social change, to embrace? Alternatively, some might suggest, only by teaching our students to think critically, and independently, can we empower them to understand how hegemonic systems and processes have kept disadvantaged groups uneducated and disadvantaged for generations, whilst maintained the capacity of privileged people to dominate them and profit from them. Perhaps the answer depends on precisely what social purposes universities have in mind, and

A Response from Santha

whether they anticipate achieving them or are merely proposing them. How serious are we about our social purpose? Having lower expectations of those who need to overcome disadvantage appears, on the face of it, somewhat counter-productive to achieving social change.

7.6.6 So, if We Are Serious About the Social Purposes of Universities, What Should We Be Doing About It? Our task here is to bring together what has been addressed in previous chapters and in this chapter, in a way that will make sense to university teachers and administrators charged with the task of ensuring that graduates leave university troubled with the interests of society and of themselves, rather than simply with their own interests. First, we need to remove from our minds the idea that universities have a social purpose that depends on university teachers convincing students to behave in particular ways. That should be easy, as very little of this is in current assessed curricula. It might be appended as a graduate profile or list of graduate attributes that we hope students will achieve, but it is so rarely evaluated to have been achieved that it will be no great loss to university teachers and for students to see these jettisoned. Second, we need to understand that what our students learn from us is not simply what is written in our curricula; much is in the hidden curriculum of how we behave ourselves. Our substantial task is to ensure that our students learn how to decipher these hidden instructions and decide for themselves how appropriate these ways of behaving are for them. Critical thinking is their major tool to this end, and teaching the skills and dispositions of critical thinking our main task. The intellectual independence of our graduates is our aim. If we do our job properly, we have reason to hope that our graduates learn the value of collaboration in achieving their own skills and dispositions to think critically, the value of these skills and dispositions in guiding

117

their own beliefs and actions, and the value of working collaboratively in turning actions into results. This should also be relatively straightforward, but may not be. University people collaborate extensively, locally and internationally. Collaboration is hard-wired into the ethos of collegiate higher education and should be easy to role-model. But, somehow, perhaps particularly in recent years, we have learned to forget this as we apply ourselves to the development of our students as individuals, rather than as a generation that is empowered to change the world. Surely we need to encourage our students to learn collaboratively far more than we do at present. Third, we need to provoke our students to extend themselves beyond Level 11 learning, to question everything around them, including their professors, their families and their societies. We cannot teach them how to learn at Level 111 but we need to encourage it and learn to recognise it if we can. Perhaps we, university teachers, will need to be sure that we are thinking and learning at Level 111, and role model what we are doing. Thinking about the social purposes of universities in this way emphasises that the work in front of us is not to be only focused on what our students do, or our societies, but on what we do. Thinking about the social purposes of universities in this way emphasises that it is we who are deficient, and it is upon ourselves that our endeavours must be targeted. How well we are doing it, and how we will know how well we are doing it is an important topic for the next chapter in this book.

A Response from Santha Kerry argues, in my understanding, that the most important purpose of higher education should be the cultivation of intellectual independence, and that by properly addressing the intellectual independence of all students, higher education will do the best that it can at present to produce graduates who are prepared to tackle social and environmental injustices. Whenever we think about higher education with specific social purposes, scholars like Kerry may become concerned about

118

7  Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives…

whether such an education would work against the goal of cultivating intellectual independence. I have a few impressions which are at variance with this concern, and these are summarised in the following paragraphs. Why should there be a chapter on intellectual independence in a book that deals with social purposes of higher education? There are at least three probable answers: (a) there can be some incompatibilities between the orientation towards social purposes and the cultivation of intellectual independence; (b) Cultivating intellectual independence is the key input for orienting students towards social purposes. (c) by addressing the intellectual independence of all students, higher education is doing the best that it can at present to prepare students to be able to tackle social and environmental injustices, if they choose to. I am questioning all three answers/positions. I have no disagreement with Kerry’s point that intellectual independence among students should be an important outcome of higher education. However, many colleges and universities may not be that successful in this regard. Despite this, higher education is demanded and used for other reasons. We have noted in different parts of our book that, though higher education has social purposes, many universities may not be that successful in this regard too. This is evident from the literature on education for sustainable development. These failures are much more evident in countries like India where the majority of colleges and universities (which are at a low level in terms of global ranking) fail in both cultivating intellectual independence and in orienting students towards social purposes. There is no reason to think that the failures on both these aspects - intellectual independence and social purpose  - are related. Instead, it may be that these colleges and universities provide poor quality education in general. It is the poor quality that may be leading to the failures in terms of intellectual independence. It seems that Kerry thinks that professional education programs may not aim at cultivating intellectual independence. If this perception is correct, we should accept that society needs a variety of professional education (and universities which provide it) even if their main goal is not the culti-

vation of intellectual independence. I argue that universities with specific social purposes can be reckoned as part of this professional education. Is it really true that professionals cannot be fully intellectually independent, having accepted the espoused and lived values of their profession? What do we mean by it? Perhaps this is more so for some professions, such as medicine, than for others, such as management, and perhaps these are matters of degree. Let us think about a student who comes out of an MBA program and becomes a manager of a private company. It is possible that intellectually independent people may decide to be managers of private company on their own. He/she may decide to work in a particular company autonomously. How to manage finance or workers in the company is an issue that the manager may be deciding autonomously. If they think that their choices are correct professionally (including ethically), and these are not acceptable to the owners of the company, they may decide whether to continue in the company autonomously. One may argue that such choices are not autonomous due to the pressures of external conditions (say, due to the lack of enough employment opportunities). However, such a problem exists for all people including those who have gone through education programs which explicitly aim at (and are effective in) cultivating intellectual independence. Or perhaps intellectually independent people make choices without considering external material constraints? Their choices are not driven only by their subjective attitudes which are shaped by education programs. I may not agree with Kerry that critical thinking can be compromised for professional education. Let us take the definition of critical thinking used by Kerry: Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. (Scriven and Paul 1987, np)

A Response from Santha

If this is critical thinking, can somebody be a good quality school teacher, development professional, rural manager, doctor, engineer or even manager without having such critical thinking skills? The argument that education should lead to the cultivation of intellectual independence is as good as saying education should make people ‘educated’. I agree that many education programs fail in this regard but that is because such programs fail to provide quality education. Clearly some universities that claim to promote the intellectual independence of their students, fail in this also. When we think about the operationalisation of the idea of cultivating intellectual independence, it may reflect in pedagogic approaches. For example, as noted by Kerry, student-centred learning may be more compatible with teaching intellectual independence than teacher-centred learning. Such an approach is important even for orienting students towards specific social purposes. I have no disagreement with Kerry’s argument that all forms of higher education should lead to intellectual independence among students. We agree that our students need to be taught how to think for themselves, as only then will they be able to fully understand the messages hidden in their upbringing and education and employment that may appear reasonable, for the benefit of themselves, their own family, and their employer, but that may not lead to social and environmental justice. In any university setting, a small (set) of students may become intellectually independent through their education; a small set also may contribute to specific social purposes. However, the latter share may not be enough or attractive to a university with a specific social purpose. The universities which are established with specific social purposes may want to see that a greater share of their students contribute to their specific purpose. However, this does not necessarily mean that these universities should be indoctrinating students. I suggest that it is possible to combine intellectual independence and ability to work towards specific social purposes in an education program. Whether to work towards social purpose or not can be an intellectually independent

119

decision. This may be similar to decisions made by a manager in a private company. Or the possibilities for the pursuit of intellectual independence could be higher than that for a manager in a for-profit private company owned by a few individuals. There can be other ways to see that such universities get students who are better aligned with its purposes. One is to ensure that it attracts only those students who are more likely to contribute to such purposes. This likelihood may depend on both subjective and material circumstances. First could be attracting those students who want to pursue education with specific social purposes due to their prior orientation. Universities may have to think about ways of identifying and selecting such students. There could be uncertainties regarding the interest of these students. However, in this case, students have a specific attitude and orientation, and the job of these universities is to enhance the capabilities of students in terms of their information, skills and capacities in general so that they can contribute to the specific social purpose more effectively. The other possibility is to focus on those people who are engaged in professions which are connected to the specific purposes. For example, there are school teachers who work in poorer neighbourhoods, and their abilities to meet the education requirements of students from poorer families can be enhanced. In such a case, the university may have to focus on the education of working professionals. It is not that all professionals who get training from such a university will be ready to use the enhanced capacity for social purpose. However, their constraints in terms of inadequate information, exposure and capacity can be solved through such education programs. In summary, an individual’s willingness and ability to work towards specific social purposes may depend on a variety of factors. Through school and undergraduate education, all students may think independently to some degree (depending on the success of general education). However, there may be other missing elements in their education if they need to be effective in contributing towards social purposes. Universities

120

7  Competitive Individualism, Intellectual Independence and Imagining some Alternatives…

with specific social purposes can provide these missing elements (which may include an appropriate learning experience). My sense is the root of our disagreements is due to the different goals that we have in writing this book. Mine was to highlight the opportunities and challenges of a small set of universities with specific social purposes. Yours focused on the need for all universities to have some impact on achieving the sustainable development goals through their teaching. I focus on a small set of universities, and these can be considered as part of professional education. My position is that such a professional education is compatible with the cultivation of intellectual independence. I understand that you identify my position as equivalent to what you describe as ESD Plan A, that you wish me well in my endeavours, but that you simply ask me, and others in my position, to monitor, evaluate, measure, or research my successes, while you focus on developing Plan B, just in case my approach does not work. Clearly, we should have the same expectations for Plan B. That may not work either. Santhakumar

References Aikenhead GS (1990) Scientific/technological literacy, critical reasoning, and classroom practice. In: Norris SP, Phillips LM (eds) Foundations of literacy policy in Canada. Detselig, Calgary Annala J, Lindén J, Mäkinen M, Henriksson J (2021) Understanding academic agency in curriculum change in higher education. Teach High Educ:1–18. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1881772 Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (2021) Mission, vision and commitments. Retrieved from https://www.aashe.org/ about-­us/mission-­vision-­commitments/ Association of American Colleges & Universities (2018) Civic Learning. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/ resources/civic-­learning Barnett R (2015) A curriculum for critical being. In: Davies M, Barnett R (eds) The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057_4 Biggs J, Tang C (2007) Teaching for quality learning at university. SRHE and OUP Bloom BS (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives. Volume one: cognitive domain. McKay, New York

Bowers C (2010) The insights of Gregory Bateson on the connections between language and the ecological crisis. Lang Ecol 3(2):1 Brennan J, Naidoo R (2008) Higher education and the achievement (and/or prevention) of equity and social justice. High Educ 56(3):287–302 Brookfield SD (2012) Teaching for critical thinking: tools and techniques to help students question their assumptions. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco Chen L (2017) Understanding critical thinking in Chinese sociocultural contexts: a case study in a Chinese college. Think Skills Creat 24:140–151. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.02.015 Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Retrieved from https://stearnscenter.gmu. edu/wp-­content/uploads/12-­The-­Delphi-­Report-­on-­ Critical-­Thinking.pdf Fukuyama F (2022) Liberalism and its discontents. Profile, London Gaon S, Norris SP (2001) The undecidable grounds of scientific expertise: science education and the limits of intellectual independence. J Philos Educ 35(2):187–201 Harari YN (2018) 21 lessons for the 21st century. Speigel and Grau, New York Hardwig J (1985) Epistemic dependence. J Philos 82(7):335–349 Hardwig J (1991) The role of Trust in Knowledge. J Philos 88(12):693–708 Kolb DA (1984) Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs Komatsu H, Rappleye J, Silova I (2021) Student-centered learning and sustainability: solution or problem? Comp Educ Rev 65(1). https://doi.org/10.1086/711829 Krathwohl DR, Bloom BS, Bertram BM (1964) Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals. Handbook II: affective domain. David McKay, New York Loyalka P, Liu OL, Li G, Kardanova E, Chirikov I, Hu S, Yu N, Ma L, Guo F, Beteille T, Tognatta N, Gu L, Ling G, Federiakin D, Wang H, Khanna S, Bhuradia A, Shi Z, Li Y (2021) Skill levels and gains in university STEM education in China, India, Russia and the United States. Nature Human Behaviour. https://doi. org/10.1038/s41562-­021-­01062-­3 Marginson S, Yang L (2022) Individual and collective outcomes of higher education: a comparison of Anglo-­ American and Chinese approaches. Glob Soc Educ 20(1):1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2021.1 932436 Matapo J, McFall-McCaffery JT (2022) Towards a vā knowledge ecology: mobilising Pacific philosophy to transform higher education for Pasifika in Aotearoa New Zealand. J High Educ Policy Manag 44(2):122– 137. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2022.2041258 Mezirow J (1991) Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

References New Zealand Legislation (2020) Education and Training Act 2020, Establishment of institutions. Retrieved from https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2020/0038/latest/LMS202213.html O’Neill G, McMahon T (2005) Student-centred learning: what does it mean for students and lecturers? In: O’Neill G, Moore S, McMullin B (eds) Emerging issues in the practice of university learning and teaching. AISHE, Dublin, pp 27–36 Oliver JS, Nichols BK (2001) Intellectual independence as a persistent theme in the literature of science education: 1900–1950. School Sci Math 101(1):49–59 Paul R (2000) Critical thinking, moral integrity and citizenship: teaching for the intellectual virtues. Knowledge, belief and character. Read Virtue Epistemol, 163–175 Rātima TM, Smith JP, Macfarlane AH, Riki NM, Jones K-L, Davies LK (2022) Ngā Hau e Whā o Tāwhirimātea: culturally responsive teaching and learning for the tertiary sector. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.26021/11870 Repko AF, Szostak R, Buchberger MP (2014) Introduction to interdisciplinary studies. Sage Scriven M (1966) Student values as educational objectives, SSEC publication no. 124. ERIC Clearinghouse, Washington, DC Scriven M, Paul R (1987) Cited by the foundation for critical thinking. Defining Critical Thinking. Retrieved

121 from https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/ defining-­critical-­thinking/766 Shephard K (2015) Higher education for sustainable development. Palgrave Macmillan, London Shephard K (2020) Higher education for sustainability: Seeking intellectual independence in Aotearoa New Zealand. Springer, Singapore. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-15-1940-6 Shephard K (2022) On intellectual independence: the principal aim of universities in New Zealand. NZ J Educ Stud Adv Online Publ. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40841-­022-­00250-­7 Shephard K, Egan T (2018) Higher education for professional and civic values: a critical review and analysis. Sustainability 10(12):4442 Sloman SA, Fernbach P (2017) The knowledge illusion: why we never think alone. Riverheads Books, New York Stephens S (2000) Handbook for culturally responsive science curriculum. Alaska Science Consortium and the Alaska Rural Systemic Initiative Stephens NM, Fryberg SA, Markus HR, Johnson CS, Covarrubias R (2012) Unseen disadvantage: how American universities’ focus on independence undermines the academic performance of first-generation college students. J Pers Soc Psychol 102(6):1178– 1197. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027143

8

Governance of Social Purpose

8.1 Kerry to Santha After many months of conversations and joint development of chapters on participation, learning and teaching, community engagement and research, in the context of social purpose, we have reached a stage where we are beginning to understand each other, to the extent that perhaps we are in a position to agree on, in a broad-brush sort of way, what the social purposes of universities are, in what ways some of the social purposes become identified as ‘specific’ and so deserve a special place in our analysis, and how these social purposes relate to universities’ potential contribution to the achievement of the internationally agreed sustainable development goals. Neither of us doubts the earnestness with which governments, universities and university academics seek to use the powers and advantages of higher education to achieve improvements in social and environmental justice extant in our world. Such earnestness is explicit in academic mission statements, policies and strategies throughout the world. Nowhere is this more apparent than in higher educations’ research aspirations defined in, as examples, India’s NEP, the UK’s REF (Research Excellence Framework) and New Zealand’s PBRF (performance-based research fund), and described in our chapter on research, often with a focus on economic prosperity, but equally often focussed on individual,

community and environmental health and to academic impacts on national and international policy. All of these policy instruments, and their consequences on academic activities, make it clear that universities have social purposes, and that the institution of higher education is willing to drive institutions, departments and individual academics towards having impact for these purposes. We do doubt, however, that such noble aspirations adequately interact with some of the other functions of universities, notably teaching, and we express concern that not only might they fail to support these other functions but perhaps even undermine them. Now is certainly the time for us to be specific about the social purposes that we are most concerned about and that deserve the label ‘specific’.

8.2 Santha to Kerry As you have hinted correctly, we need to get back to the basics of our book once again. Although much can be learned from our exploration of what institutions with specific social purposes are doing, and from what institutions who adopt ESD attempt, all institutions face difficulties. My starting point is that such challenges are common in a set of HEIs which have similar objectives. I see the following three distinctly different in terms of purposes and processes:

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_8

123

8  Governance of Social Purpose

124

1. Creating a social (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs. 2. Giving HE to students from poorer and marginalised groups: This is achieved through three processes: 2.1 Reservation (or affirmative action). 2.2 Certain ‘dilution’ of HE so that these students can get it. 2.3 Creating a different HE so that they can address some of their specific issues. 3. Development of institutions with specific social purposes (Such as APU and IRMA in India). Perhaps 2.3 and 3 have much in common, but 1, 2.1, 2.2 are different.

8.3 Kerry to Santha Let’s start with “Creating a ‘social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs.” As you know, and as readers might have realised by now, I doubt this is a reasonable purpose for the institution of higher education, given its history and traditional mandate. And I doubt that the higher education that I know is capable of doing this. My own experience of higher education people and understanding of educational processes suggests that many, perhaps most, current university teachers are not particularly well-­placed to teach their students to have social or environmental orientation, a profoundly values-­based task. Many university teachers who I know, and who you know, do not think that this is a reasonable purpose for a ‘higher’ education, although we both know others who think it is. I identify this aim of “Creating a ‘social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs.” as ESD1 Plan A.  I wish those who adopt it well, and only ask that they routinely evaluate the extent to which their plan is working, so that they do not waste our precious time, just in case it is not working. Education for sustainable development.

1 

I do not doubt, however, that this aim is implicit within the agreed sustainable development goals, and explicit in educational strategies throughout the world. I also accept the possibility, perhaps even likelihood, that on balance, higher educations’ impact on its students through its teaching is the opposite of this. How would we know if we do not evaluate, research, monitor or measure the extent to which our students develop in this way? We have addressed these matters in the context of teaching, community engagement and the operation of institutions with specific social purposes in previous chapters and our analysis finds very little evidence that higher education is achieving these orientations in its students, has any significant capacity to do so, or any reasonable means to determine the extent to which it achieves these things. Even so, promoting ESD Plan A is a major drive in the academic world of ESD.  From a governance perspective we need to ask how existing and historical governance processes got us to where we are now, exactly where we are now, and how we might make progress moving forward. As suggested in our Prologue, there are some stark choices to be made by those who govern higher education; choices that relate to the fundamental purpose of higher education itself. Moving on to “Giving HE to students from poorer and marginalised groups: through Reservation (or affirmative action); dilution’ of HE so that these students can get it; creating a different HE so that they can address some of their specific issues.”, we have come to realise that our views align quite well. We both agree that higher education cannot remain the prerogative of elite sectors of our nations, that forms of affirmative action are essential to create change in this direction, and that higher education needs to adapt not only to accommodate diverse educational starting points of its learners, but also to the educational aspirations of all those who join higher education. Again, governance choices need to be made, but although they may lead to massive changes, the decisions themselves are not of such a fundamental nature. We do not think it possible to argue that some groups within our societies are not worthy of a higher education

8.4  Diverse Factors Contribute to the Decisions That Universities Make About What They Teach

because of who they are or where they live. We agree that “Development of institutions with specific social purposes (Such as APU and IRMA in India)” is essentially one possible element of the broader arguments addressed in this paragraph. I suggest that our chapter on governance should progress as an exploration of the choices that those who govern higher education need to make, explored in particular through your own analysis of the characteristics of higher education that present barriers to change. In 2010 I wrote an article for the Australian Universities Review, in which I imagined a fraught higher education rector, vice-chancellor or principal tackling an overwhelming in-tray of things to do. At the time I thought it inevitable that such colleagues would feel obliged to put sustainability somewhat low down on his or her to-do list (Shephard 2010) and I could empathise with that, if not agree with it. I wonder if our analysis would produce a similar perspective nowadays?

8.4 Diverse Factors Contribute to the Decisions That Universities Make About What They Teach 8.4.1 Santha to Kerry 8.4.1.1 What Employers Want and How This Affects What Universities Teach When employers look at the name of a university for its signalling purpose, what is taught in the university (or how much the student has internalised it) becomes less important than the institution’s reputation. The extent to which an institution’s reputation has an impact on the graduate premium (how much more a graduate earns than a non-graduate) has been explored in detail (see a recent analysis by Percy and Bhattacharya 2021, who suggested that “A meaningful share of the value of the degree comes from the fact you were able to get into a particular university rather than what you learned there (np)”. This can have a number of implications. In certain professions, such as in the case of business managers and doc-

125

tors, there generally is a substantial connection between the content of the curriculum and the practice of professionals who graduate from the degree program. This may be due to the way such programs have evolved and the constant touch that many professors have with their field of practice, through for example, the use of case studies (Papaloizos and Stiefel 1971). However, this connection is weaker in the case of typical graduate programs in social sciences, humanities or even natural sciences. Employers who look for candidates from such degree programmes may look for certain general proficiencies, and the particular degree, but are also greatly influenced by the reputation of the university as a signal. Abel and Deitz (2015) provide a helpful commentary on why so many graduates get jobs unrelated to their degree in the USA.

8.4.1.2 Academic Freedom of University Teachers One impact of this disconnection is that academics have great autonomy in deciding what is to be taught. Though there are merits in this autonomy, it has created a situation where the content of education is determined more by the internal dynamics of academic disciplines and professional linkages and less by the imperatives of the socioeconomic context. These internal factors are shaped by the philosophical, methodological and sociological boundaries of different disciplines. Hence teaching in higher education became much more suitable for those who want to be academics and researchers who can confine themselves within these disciplinary boundaries but not so much to those who have to apply the knowledge in the real world where the challenges are somewhat diverse and different from those which are taken into account in the development of knowledge in each discipline. This may not be a serious issue if the expectation from higher education is a certain general capability and not the knowledge that can be applied in specific contexts. Or if the expectation is that persons with such a general capability would be in a position to acquire skills/knowledge which are relevant for specific purposes. However, this could be an issue if the education

126

in universities is expected to meet specific social purposes. For example, it may be problematic if the content of education is to enable a specific group of students to address their own specific challenges, as in the case of indigenous people.2 This is so since such a connection is possible only if the content of the degree programme is designed to meet the needs of the specific social purpose, for example, by being taught in a suitable language, or with cultural competence related to the culture involved. The academic autonomy, which is facilitated more by the signalling role, and less by the need for relevant knowledge creation and dissemination, can lead to a disconnection between what is taught in the universities and what may be needed for the real world. Academic autonomy has other impacts. Even if there could be academic committees or peer review to make academic decisions, committee members and reviewers are generally conventional academics. This can lead to a path-­ dependence in conventional universities on the decisions on what is to be taught or what is to be recognised as appropriate education. However, when a university commits to a specific social purpose, some of the imperatives of an education that is suitable for such a purpose may have to be decided by outsiders (and these may include social activists, policy-makers, or funders of such an education). This can create challenges either to the autonomy of academics or the ability of external actors to influence the system. These challenges can work against the adoption of an appropriate education in the universities with specific social purposes.

8  Governance of Social Purpose

education in the form of disciplines. Disciplinary teaching is useful to those who intend to master a particular discipline to be an expert or an academic or teacher of that discipline. It may be beneficial to those undergraduates who want to get an exposure to diverse disciplines. However, the integration of the knowledge from different disciplines to create an ‘educated person’ is expected to take place in the minds of students. University teachers in a conventional university may not have much of a role in this regard due to their segregation in the form of departments and disciplines. There are professional education programmes of different kind to create medical doctors, engineers, business managers and so on. Teaching in these cases is heavily focussed on one discipline even though the actual teaching is carried out in different sub-disciplines. Accordingly, integration between these sub disciplines is relatively easy (in the minds of students). Moreover, exposure to professional experience (which may happen at different levels in different institutes of higher education) may also enable this process of integration so that the knowledge from different sub-disciplines as a whole contributes to the creation of a professional. However, these professionals are often available to the economy as a whole and not necessarily to any particular social group or to address a specific social problem. The monetary success of those who pass out of these degree programmes in the economy impacts the demand for such professional education programmes. On the other hand, teaching in natural sciences and in social sciences is somewhat different. In natural sciences, there is a consensus 8.4.1.3 Disciplines Dominate among the academic community about the strucUniversity Teaching ture of the discipline. There will be attempts to In conventional universities, a set of disciplines teach the fundamental concepts of the discipline. like physics, economics, history, etc., are taught. Though there could be some efforts to give stuThere are historical reasons for organising higher dents an exposure to the way the concepts in the discipline have evolved, there will be a greater focus on what is the current understanding (rather 2  Some of the challenges in the higher education of than giving an equal treatment of all past theoindigenous people are discussed in this article: https:// ries). Though the main purpose of teaching in an p r a c t i c e c o n n e c t . a z i m p r e m j i u n iv e r s i t y. e d u . i n / intercultural-universities-in-latin-america-lessons-for-­ undergraduate degree may not be the creation of india/ experts or university teachers of the discipline,

8.4  Diverse Factors Contribute to the Decisions That Universities Make About What They Teach

the focus is on the understanding of the discipline in its current form. However, in most social sciences or humanities, there may not be a ­presumption of a secular growth in the discipline, and hence a diversity of theories or views may be retained in the curriculum. The students may be exposed to these diverse theories or there could be a focus on one set without an explicit articulation of the justification for excluding others. These may be due to the ideological and methodological preferences of teachers. Students are expected to have an exposure to the multiplicity of views or to pick up the one that suits their interest, and their cultural/ideological/normative preferences. These need not always be in alignment with any specific social purpose.

8.4.1.4 Limited Resources All universities work with limited available resources. The time that a student spends in the classroom within a degree programme (of a fixed number of years) is also such a resource. Hence any education programme may have to select certain disciplines, sub-disciplines, concepts within these disciplines, pedagogical approaches and exclude others for the purpose of effectiveness. This may happen even in a liberal undergraduate programme where students have a greater flexibility to take a diverse set of courses. This scarcity of resources may affect the choice of what is (not) to be taught in a degree programme. This decision in a conventional university may not be aimed at any specific social purpose. 8.4.1.5 Postgraduate Specialisation, Vocational Learning and the Notion of the ‘Ideal’ in Conventional Universities In many universities, there is an implicit assumption that those who do well in learning a discipline at the undergraduate level may go for post-graduate and possibly doctoral degrees. This is viewed as the ideal in terms of learning, and it is not unusual to see this ideal shaping the teaching even in undergraduate classrooms. Those who are not meeting this ideal standard may (or be somewhat expected to) dropout from disciplinary education after the undergraduate degree

127

and take up a ‘normal’ job. This perceived inferiority of those who seek normal jobs does not encourage university teachers to focus on their needs. This also impacts the place of vocational or applied learning in universities. There is a traditional preference for (and a higher social valuation of) seeking knowledge for its own sake in India (Mukherjee 1947) that persists today (Sethi 2022) and this may encourage the pursuit of an esoteric knowledge which is not ‘polluted’ by the concerns of the real world. This may also work against the pursuit of specific social purposes through higher education. The application of knowledge in specific contexts may not be an objective of most education programs in a conventional university. Hence the ability to apply the knowledge in a new context may not be seen as a necessary proficiency in graduates. Hence testing this proficiency may not be part of the evaluation or assessment of students. Moreover, testing such an ability may create certain logistic requirements and hence may be avoided. This may make the evaluation of specific subjects mostly based on desk-based assignments. All these may reduce the capability to apply the knowledge – a capability which is particularly important in universities with specific social purposes.

8.4.2 Kerry to Santha The factors that influence what universities teach are indeed highly diverse, and although your commentary focuses on India, these factors are likely universal to some degree. Nowadays calls for universities to decolonise their curricula are strengthening and the rationales for this, and objectives being sought, are also diverse (Winter et  al. 2022). The field of enquiry known as Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) has maintained a discourse on barriers to its implementation over many years (Cotton et  al. 2009) that strongly accords with your insights and has much in common with decolonisation discourses and those that explore class-based and socioeconomic-based differences in university participation. Similarly, the extent to which

128

universities do, or should, engage in vocational education is highly contested internationally. Some nations maintained separate categories of ­institutions, such as polytechnics for primarily vocational programmes, and universities for more academic programmes, but then accepted that such distinctions were problematic. Distinctions between polytechnics and universities in Aotearoa New Zealand were systematically reduced in 1989. In the UK, polytechnics were upgraded to universities in 1992. India’s forty thousand plus colleges with links to universities are highly diverse and India’s current education strategy intends many to become independent, multidisciplinary, degree-granting institutions in their own right. In particular, India’s National Education Policy (NEP 2020) has identified vocational education as a key focus area. Nevertheless, categorisation of roles and modes of operation remain problematic. Medical schools, perhaps the epitome of selective higher-­ education in many nations, are highly vocational. Aotearoa New Zealand struggled with such tertiary education categorisations again in 20163 (Shephard 2017) with little to show for it in the form of systematic change in the university sector, although notably the polytechnic sector was dramatically reorganised, perhaps to refocus its attention on vocational education. And it is reasonable to suggest that although some of these factors are clearly of universities’ own making (such as the way that disciplines dominate their being), they have less control over others (such as how employers respond to reputation, how market forces operate to make some of their possible actions more affordable than others, and how governments incentivise certain actions over others). Even so, universities still have choices. They may be limited in what they are able to do by their nation’s legislation, but rarely are they prevented from doing the right thing, or actually doing what they tell the world they do. They choose how to allocate their limited resources. They choose which disciplines to Productivity Commission. (2016) Tertiary Education Issues Paper. http://productivity.govt.nz/sites/default/ files/tertiary-education-issues-paper.pdf 3 

8  Governance of Social Purpose

focus on. Many get to choose which students to recruit. Perhaps on balance they choose whether to do the right thing, or to advance up the international rankings, to build their reputation, or to survive; but they still make active choices. Their academic freedom may be more limited in some settings, but in general, universities have choices, and in general and historically they have chosen not to adopt the specific social purposes that this book focuses on. We should not see these as barriers as much as choices.

8.5 Teaching Social Purposes May Need Changes in the Way Disciplines are Taught 8.5.1 Santha to Kerry 8.5.1.1 How We Teach What We Teach In conventional universities in countries like India, even social sciences like economics and sociology may be taught in the form of universal theories and principles. This kind of teaching may not enable students to use the knowledge of a specific subject to understand their own social reality or the kind of context that they may encounter as part of their career. For example, the knowledge of economics should equip an economics student from a village/town of India to understand the kind of economic problems in his/ her own context. Though we may presume such a familiarity as an outcome of studying economics as a discipline in the university, this is rarely achieved in reality. This may have to do with the way economics as a discipline has evolved, the conceptualisation of the basic framework, which is to be taught to all students, the ability of this basic framework to describe the problems of less developed economies, and the way the subject is taught historically which has shaped the capability of teachers, and hence the way they teach currently. Even if we presume that teaching of conventional disciplines like economics and sociology in isolation from its practical implications in developing nations is required for all universities

8.5  Teaching Social Purposes May Need Changes in the Way Disciplines are Taught

that acknowledge their social purposes, the current way of teaching may not help to achieve this purpose. Teaching subjects with a specific ­purpose may require a lot more application than what is currently happening in conventional universities. For example, if a university in India aims at addressing caste discrimination through higher education, it may require teaching of sociology, economics, psychology and so on. However, teaching these subjects in a conventional, abstracted, way may not help achieve an institution’s social purposes through its teaching role. To achieve this, institutions would need to ask what impact their teaching has on those attributes of their students that may influence the ways these students think and act in relation to the caste system; and to develop their teaching in ways that influence these things. Such education would need to be not simply about the caste system, but for social justice, as suggested in the introduction to this chapter. Each course under each discipline may require a packaging to make it appropriate to enhance the understanding of students on how caste discrimination is created, sustained and potentially changed, and about the role that these students have in this change. There is a need for many purpose-oriented courses within and across disciplines, but conventional universities have in general not been particularly willing to teach in these ways. This topic is discussed in more detail later in this chapter.

8.5.1.2 Social Purposes May Need More Multidisciplinary and Interdisciplinary Learning Universities with specific social purposes may need multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary courses, since the purpose is connected to social change, and such a change may require understanding of different factors which contribute to and sustain the status quo. These different factors may be the focus of different academic disciplines. Understanding their combined or synergic impact on social problems and how these can be changed may require a multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary understanding. Conventional university settings are not so conducive for genuine development of interdisciplinary courses

129

(see for example, Wade and Stone 2010). This is mainly due to the fact that there is no felt need for academics to take the effort to go beyond one’s own discipline and to work with a colleague from another discipline. The implied power relations, and the sociology of disciplines and teaching profession, may work against the development of such courses. There are incentives which facilitate working on one’s own discipline. There may not be many academics who are willing to acquire proficiency in different disciplines and develop competencies in an interdisciplinary understanding. This is another factor that may limit conventional universities in their teaching with specific social purposes.

8.5.2 Kerry to Santha Again, we should consider if these factors are best framed as barriers or choices. Casting them as barriers implies that they impose themselves from without, and that academics within have little control over them. Addressing them as choices that we in universities make ourselves identifies them as things that we actually have some control over. The challenges of interdisciplinary teaching have been well documented. Bauer (1990) emphasised the degree to which interdisciplinary work requires learners to overcome their discipline-specific but often unconscious habits of thought, and how challenging this is in conventional learning settings. But Boyer identified interdisciplinarity as a discrete scholarship (the scholarship of integration), one of four scholarships that all academics should at least engage with; and something that should be cultivated and assessed (Boyer 1996). Much conspires against the interdisciplinary scholar, including challenges to get research funding and to have papers published. Yet it is these same scholars who sit on grant review-boards, and who act as editors and reviewers, who impose these challenges. These are not barriers, but the choices that university people make, every day. Similarly, academics’ propensity to avoid teaching values (Shephard 2008, 2023) or transformatory change (Winter et  al. 2015) other than that directly

130

related to their particular discipline, is widely accepted. Academics in many settings choose to teach for racial tolerance and for gender equity, but choose not to teach for environmental justice and some forms of social justice. These are all active choices made by academics and facilitated by governance structures designed and operated by academics. Limitations on what individual disciplines teach and how they teach it have also been of great concern within disciplines for many years. For example, the extent to which the discipline of sociology educates people who are able to become sociologists after graduation, or simply provides them with sociology theory to learn, has been discussed (Tolich 2012). Tolich went on to explore how a university-run internship course involving community engagement could prepare students for a functional career as a sociologist (Tolich et al. 2016). There is no doubt that such teaching, and learning, is demanding for all involved, but also that its possibilities relate primarily to the choices that academics make. This is likely true for many forms of higher education pedagogy that take students out of the classroom. The international discourse on graduate attributes is highly relevant to this consideration. Graduate attributes are widely appreciated as factors that enable students to learn within disciplines (Barrie 2004). My own institution suggests; All University of Otago graduates will possess a deep, coherent and extensive knowledge of at least one discipline, coupled with knowledge of the fundamental contribution of research to that discipline. In addition, all Otago graduates will possess, to varying degrees, the following sets of attributes… (University of Otago n.d., np)

and includes attributes such as global perspective (Appreciation of global perspectives in the chosen discipline(s) and the nature of global citizenship), ethics (Knowledge of ethics and ethical standards and an ability to apply these with a sense of responsibility within the workplace and community) and environmental literacy (Basic understanding of the principles that govern natural systems, the effects of human activity on these

8  Governance of Social Purpose

systems, and the cultures and economies that interact with those systems). There appears little doubt that university teachers in this institution teach and assess the “deep, coherent and extensive knowledge of at least one discipline” but every reason to doubt the extent to which these same teachers teach, for example, “Knowledge of ethics and ethical standards and an ability to apply these with a sense of responsibility within the workplace and community” (Brown et  al. 2019). Teaching a sense of responsibility is likely to be a key element of Santha’s aspiration for ‘Creating a ‘social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs’. Research does not suggest that higher education is incapable of doing such things, only that universities and their teachers generally choose not to. Given the relatively flat hierarchy that is typical in higher education, these choices may not emanate from those who govern higher education, but are certainly condoned by them.

8.6 Teacher Identity, Development and Progression 8.6.1 Santha to Kerry 8.6.1.1 Who Becomes Teachers in Universities and Its Impact on Teaching for Social Purposes The teachers in universities are those who go for higher levels of education. Higher levels of education in a particular discipline are more likely to focus on the universally-valid frameworks and concepts which are in use in the discipline. The application of knowledge is less likely to be a concern for those who get post-graduate and doctoral education in specific disciplines in natural and social sciences. This may reduce the willingness and capability of these highly educated people to teach courses for specific social purposes. In addition, recruitment and promotion of teachers in conventional universities is based mostly on the publication of research articles in peer-­ reviewed journals. The globally top-rated journals are likely to publish universally valuable research.

8.6  Teacher Identity, Development and Progression

Since the ideal form of learning is the one which creates researchers of a particular discipline, the proficiency in doing such research and getting such research accepted for publication by the global peers, is an ‘appropriate quality’ to be a teacher in a conventional university. However, this quality may not be adequate to educate students who are expected to work towards specific social purposes. This problem cannot be solved by having faculty who are not ‘good’ at publishing research in international peer-reviewed journals. The conventional university has developed a hierarchy of researchers with some who are very proficient in doing publishable research at the top and others who may not do so at the lower end. This could be a reflection of their proficiency in meeting the requirements of conventional universities. Institutions that embrace specific social purposes will need to appoint appropriate faculty. Applying the same criteria as applied in more conventional teaching and research situations might not be effective. This topic has been considered also in Chap. 2 (in the context of asking which participating students succeed in conventional settings and so who stays on to teach) and in Chap. 5 (in the context of specific needs of and for community-­ engaged academics). Chap. 4 also considered the extent to which teachers’ motivation to engage with social purposes could be intrinsic, embracing a personal disposition to be so engaged, or extrinsic, in response to drivers imposed by institutional governance or professional standards.

8.6.1.2 Practitioners as Teachers in Universities with Specific Social Purposes? We may think that practitioners may be better suited to be teachers in universities with specific social purposes. Though practitioners can have a useful role in such universities, a sole reliance on them may not lead to desired outcomes. If academics have limited experience of the use of knowledge, practitioners may not base their work in accumulated knowledge-base of disciplines. This may prevent them from developing generalisable insights. However, they may not recognise

131

this limitation, and hence may inculcate a practice-­based knowledge which is not generalisable or a generalisation which may not go through a rigorous scrutiny. This may lead to an overestimation of the replicability of models which are successful in specific contexts, without understanding the contextual factors which may have contributed to their success. These issues may limit the use of practitioners as the teachers of universities with specific social purposes.

8.6.2 Kerry to Santha There is a developing international discourse on academic identity and the drivers that create it. This confirms academic identity as a major element of interest in social purpose. Much attention internationally addresses dispositions for teaching, rather than for research, in particular in research-led universities. McCune, for example, exploring how university teachers sustain identities that include deep care for teaching in research-led universities, suggested that “maintaining engagement with teaching in contemporary higher education is likely to involve identity struggles requiring considerable cognitive and emotional energy on the part of academics …” (McCune 2021, 30). Broader research on professional identities confirms that who we think we are influences what we do, that people become what they are because of what they do and what they experience whilst doing it (see for example Watson 2006). Extensive research nowadays addresses what motivates people to do particular things, such as in our case addressing specific social issues in our teaching. Self-determination theory (SDT, Ryan and Deci 2000) suggests that individuals in a range of contexts require three basic psychological needs to be fulfilled to be motivated towards particular ends. Individuals need to feel competent to undertake the tasks before them; they need to feel in control and have some autonomy in deciding how to undertake the task; and they benefit from being socially included with others undertaking similar tasks. It may be reasonable to suggest that university teachers in many settings nowadays would struggle

8  Governance of Social Purpose

132

to fulfil all three of these basic psychological needs in the context of ‘Creating a ‘social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs’. I personally accept that teaching values is possible, and that university teachers do this whether they plan to or not (though not necessarily sustainability values!), but I doubt my own ability to create, though my teaching “… a ‘social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs.”, I doubt the worthiness of the educational environment in which I might attempt to do it, and I would struggle to find others to do it with or be interested in my attempts to do it. I have previously commented on the challenges involved in teaching values that teachers themselves do not share and suggested that “Charges of hypocrisy may be more worrying to me personally than charges of indoctrination.” (Shephard 2015, 85). SDT is taken very seriously in business settings and as part of the expanding discourse on leadership and governance. All three ‘basic psychological needs’ are addressed by those who govern higher education, implicit in the choices that they make. Dispositions to research or to practise are also important identity factors. The role of practitioners in higher education has been debated for many years, particularly in professional departments such as teacher-education and nursing. Are our trainee nurses and teachers best taught by practitioners, who have had years of experience nursing and teaching but lack PhDs, or by research-led academics, with PhDs, and research profiles, but perhaps limited experience actually nursing or teaching? And should either group receive training to teach in higher education before being allowed to teach our higher education students? Some research questions the extent to which those with PhDs are adequately prepared to meet the demands of teaching in higher education (Bullin 2018) and a great deal of research nowadays explores the roles of teaching-­only academics. Even so, there appears no doubt that staffing patterns in university systems have changed dramatically in recent years, so choices are being made by someone, or by many. A recent report by

King’s College London’s Policy Institute (Wolf and Jenkins (2021) about changes in the UK suggests that numbers of senior managerial and administrative posts have risen markedly, the number of technicians and secretarial posts have declined, there has been ongoing growth in nonacademic appointments (in particular to support the student experience), and teaching-only academic posts increased at five times the rate of traditional academic roles.4 Increases in casualisation of university teaching staff appears to be an international phenomenon. Aspects of the identity of university teachers are clearly changing dramatically and to imagine that university people are not themselves involved in governance choices that are producing these changes seems fanciful. Strongly related to research on the identity of university teachers are explorations of different perspectives on what this professional group should do about sustainability, particularly in the context of their academic freedom (in some systems) to decide for themselves what to teach and what to research. Research at the University of Otago in Aotearoa New Zealand suggests that university teachers hold a wide range of positions on their roles with respect to education for sustainability. Some university teachers think it their role to teach students appropriate sustainability-­ oriented values relating to social and environmental justice, in as much as their discipline relates to these things. Others have principled reasons for not teaching their students what they should value or how to behave in these contexts. (Shephard and Furnari 2013; Brown et al. 2019). A recent analysis of higher education for sustainable development in the UK found that; “The main challenge HEIs face is engaging staff that may question the relevance of the ESD concept, and that lack an understanding regarding its implications for their discipline.” (Fiselier et al. 2018, 223). Identity, however, runs much deeper than ‘relevance and lack of understanding’. A great deal of research in the social sciences emphasises the dominant impact of social and https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/report-reveals-big-changesto-staffing-patterns-at-uk-­universities 4 

8.6  Teacher Identity, Development and Progression

personal identity on how people interpret new information (Kahan 2015). Similarly, traditional theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour from the discipline of psychology go some way towards linking the identities of people to their actions. Psychology is also the key discipline to explore the gap that exists between an individual’s attitudes about a topic and their behaviour towards it, and the nature of intrapersonal factors that may mediate between attitude and action (Frank 2021). Shephard (2023) developed a grounded theory linking limited evaluation of the impacts of university teaching on the sustainability-related learning outcomes of learners, the affective nature of these outcomes, and perceptions of the cultural identity of higher education academics. The theory suggested that reluctance to assess or evaluate some sustainability-­related teaching outcomes is inherent to academic identity as a form of identity protection, essential to preserve the established and preferred identity of academics. All this leads us to confront the awful possibility that the identity of some university teachers might somehow prevent them from acting in ways aligned to social justice, at the same time as their institutions and governments proclaim strategies and policies that anticipate their cooperation. Although forms of historical disadvantage are apparent in higher education systems in the UK (concerns about socio-economic and class factors were discussed in previous chapters) and in Aotearoa New Zealand (with an emphasis on post-colonial impacts on Māori and socioeconomic disadvantage of Pacifica peoples), it is in India where concerns about disadvantage and discrimination within higher education are most apparent, with respect in particular to women, castes and scheduled tribes. One line of enquiry explores diversity in academic groups, anticipating that in a socially-just system we might find a diversity of faculty (academic staff) representative of the wider population. India has maintained a system of affirmative action (reservation, or quota) that has had profound effects on India’s student population, but less so on its academic staff diversity, and particularly less so in its elite

133

universities. (Dhawan et  al. 2022) provide a recent analysis of government data and of the interplay between gender, caste, merit and upward social mobility in university functioning. Their research explored such matters using a mixed methods approach in four higher education institutions using questionnaires and semi-­ structured interviews designed to “elicit insights of the participants’ positionality, attitudes, and perspectives on transformation in higher education, and to shed light on the politics of participation within their institutions.” (12). On the basis of this research, these researchers concluded that “Despite the rhetoric of inclusiveness and development, the implementation of related policies clothe subalterns with the veneer of the intellectual class, permitting access on condition that sociocultural identities are concealed, and the hegemonic status quo maintained. Terms such as “quality” and “equality” function as tools for social control rather than serving social justice, where assertions of caste identity and resistance are simultaneously repudiated and misrecognized.” (1) Although this research is highly insightful with respect to our interest in the identity of university people, and its likely impact on achieving the social purposes of universities, its epistemological and ontological basis does need to be taken into account as we transfer ideas from it to our interests in governance. Nevertheless, we should not assume that such insights are unique to the higher education system of India and we certainly should wonder about the extent to which the identities of higher education teachers everywhere in the world are relevant to the current status of higher education, and to its prospects of contributing in a meaningful way and related to teaching, to the achievements of the sustainable development goals. I suggest that we are where we are because of the choices made by the academic colleagues who govern us, choices broadly dictated by their identities, and the academic choices made by those being governed. Identities run deep. They are not necessarily changed by legislation, by rules, by logic or by persuasion. Perhaps they are changed by reflection on experience, but the pedagogical processes required to

8  Governance of Social Purpose

134

create such change take time, planning and commitment. We may apply these things to our students, but we are challenged to do so for our teachers.

8.7 What Is to Be Learned and Who Is to Teach It? 8.7.1 Santha to Kerry Ultimately, students should have the capability to understand a variety of social problems; and they should have the attitude and skills to bring about the desirable social change. These may require the following proficiencies: (a) an exposure to the ways of thinking about the kind of social issues that they confront. (For example, if poverty is such a social issue, how do people view poverty systematically  – mostly from the viewpoints of different disciplines); (b) they should have a systematic (possibly evidence-based) understanding of how this social issue is addressed in different contexts. This understanding will discourage them from trying out means which have been proved to be failures in similar contexts; (c) Technical as well as organisational skills (including those which are required to deal with communities and negotiate different interests among stakeholders); and (d) an emotional or attitudinal orientation to act and bring about change. Such an attitude may be different from that of a researcher or an academic who may not have to confront the challenges in making a change in society. However, conventional universities may not teach these proficiencies adequately. Academics may not communicate a multi-disciplinary or interdisciplinary view of specific social problems; their knowledge-base may not have enough information on what can be attempted to address specific social issues; most academics may not have the skills to bring about social change (whereas those who have the skills may not have a theory-informed understanding of social issues). Academics do not have the attitude or emotional orientation to act to make changes on

the ground. Instead, some of them may even internalise those philosophical approaches which may justify the status quo in terms of human development, or argue for a non-interventionist approach towards social issues.5 All these may reduce the capability of conventional academics to bring about appropriate orientation among the students of universities with specific social purposes. Though professional courses may have such a focus on action or practice, that may not be the case in social and natural sciences or humanities. For example, learning English as a language need not necessarily have a component on how to teach this language to those whose mother tongue is different. That may require teaching English language with a specific purpose. The academics in conventional universities may not teach conventional subjects with a focus on such social actions. Moreover, they may not have the experience and exposure to the action-context to develop curriculum and pedagogy to prepare students to be ready for actions to meet the specific purposes of such universities. What is to be taught in a university and what should be the focus of other teaching institutes (like vocational school, training institute) and so on are determined mainly based on the experience of western societies which are also much more industrialised than the developing countries. If a university in a remote (less-developed and industrialised) area focuses on higher-end engineering courses or post-graduation in disciplines like economics, physics, etc., the graduates of the university may not get employment opportunities. Such a higher education may not contribute to the local development. In such

Anti-development positions are common among social scientists. This may come from those who are against capitalism. Since most developed countries are capitalist in nature, many of them see development as a reflection of capitalist social transformation. Ant-development approaches are common among post-modernists since they focus on the problems in the developed countries which came to exist as a product of development. Sections of scholars who are concerned about environmental destruction also may take an anti-development position. 5 

8.7  What Is to Be Learned and Who Is to Teach It?

cases, higher education needs to connect to the requirement of local development but some of these education programs which may enhance the capability of students in this regard may not be as acceptable as the courses in a conventional university.

8.7.2 Kerry to Santha These are strong arguments not only about the nature of learning required by students who are to be the recipients of attempts to create “… a ‘social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs”, but also about the characteristics of those who are to do the teaching. In my own writing I have explored similar ideas but emphasised why the aims of compulsory education and of higher education may need to be different. In particular I emphasise that for teachers to teach values-based change, they need to role model the change. Compulsory education in some parts of the world insist that teachers teach pupils to learn sustainability related values, so as to ‘become sustainable’ but in general, such values-based change is neither assessed or evaluated, nor is the extent to which teachers do role model the changes (Shephard 2022). A recent survey of 58,000 schoolteachers conducted by Education International and UNESCO suggests that although teachers are confident about teaching cognitive skills, they are less so about teaching socio-emotional and behavioural learning in ESD (UNESCO (2021). You and I appear to have similar perspectives on this issue as it applies to compulsory education, in systems where societies expect their school teachers to influence the values of their pupils towards predetermined societal aspirations. I maintain that your (d) “an emotional or attitudinal orientation to act and bring about change” is never a ‘proficiency’ as you suggest it to be, but a deep affective personal value, and something that higher education will always struggle with where the values concerned are not shared by society in general. Notably, however, your position as it applies to higher education is

135

shared by mainstream ESD thinking (ESD Plan A, as I describe it). The latter has a pronounced focus on teaching students to be competent in a range of particular ways. In the world of ESD, competencies are not simply skills, but combinations of cognitive and affective attributes (Brundiers et  al. 2020). ESD competencies include anticipatory thinking, systematic thinking and normative thinking, but collectively add up to something like your “social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs”. Interestingly ESD has much to say on what students are to learn, but relatively little to say about the identity of those who will teach it, the pedagogical approaches to be used, the places in which such teaching will occur and whether students with choice will choose this path. Nevertheless, your position and that of mainstream ESD thinkers has much in common. It is me that stands to one side in doubting the capacity or willingness of universities and academics to create a social (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs, or an emotional or attitudinal orientation to act and bring about change, and much as I have enjoyed learning about the work of universities that have specific social purposes, so far I have learned that they, and their academics, face the same challenges as conventional universities, and tend to make the same choices. All I ask, as always, is for institutions to match their claims with research into their practices. I am greatly looking forward to reading about universities’ successes in these regards. I suspect that much depends on who is appointed to academic roles in ‘conventional universities’ and in ‘universities with specific social purposes. If academia appointed ‘ecowarriors‘ and ‘social activists’, who role model the change that they hope to teach (Shephard 2022), and for whom “a major reward of this work could be the joy or happiness that comes from it” that you describe in Chap. 4, then you and I would have much to celebrate together. Who gets appointed to academic roles is, however, a governance matter; likely the most important governance matter of all.

136

8.7.2.1 The Roles of Institutions with Specific Social Purpose in “Giving He to Students from Poorer and Marginalised Groups” Much within our book draws from the experiences of institutions with specific social purposes. But much of our analysis suggests that although such institutions generally start off intending to be different from conventional ­universities, if they succeed at all they become subject to the same pressures that conventional higher-education institutions face, and their governance structures fail to protect them from change. Choices are made, often relating to survival, but perhaps also to reputation. The diversity of tertiary (post-secondary) education was explored in Chap. 1. There are strong arguments to suggest that an entity other than the university should be used to “create a social (or environmental) orientation in all students”, and given international universities’ abject failure to do so, and in some nations, this is certainly a role for compulsory education rather than post-compulsory education. But our book is about universities and your second aim of “Giving HE to students from poorer and marginalised groups” is rather focused on higher education. Clearly universities may choose to adopt a specific social purpose and a suitable pedagogical approach, employ suitable teachers, attract suitable students and graduate these same students into suitable employment. Our analysis, particularly based on experiences in India, suggests that such things are possible, but challenging. There appears to be little doubt that universities, even special ones, exist in complex markets nowadays. Special institutions that succeed in some ways but fail in others are likely to fail altogether. Their governance is likely to be a balancing act until such times as it all fits together. The balancing act of higher education governance in such demanding circumstances is a research theme itself. We should mention two ideas about how to make it work. Colleagues in Germany (Niedlich et al. 2020) suggest that although models of ESD governance have been proposed they tend to either be rather abstract

8  Governance of Social Purpose approaches that provide little guidance or rather restrictive management-oriented approaches. These researchers developed a “governance equaliser” model that describes sustainability governance in five dimensions—politics, profession, organisation, knowledge, and the public—and develops assessment scales for each to describe how they are addressed by higher education institutions. Authors advise that analysis should cover all domains in the HEI (education, research, campus, and outreach). The model has been tested in a series of institutional workshops and shows great promise, at least for making governance decisions and their ramifications more transparent than they might otherwise be. Our second framework Turnaround Leadership for Sustainability in Higher Education (Scott et  al. 2012) might be best described as a management-­ oriented approach, and an extreme one at that. But nonetheless, it provides a powerful model of how governance decisions on an institutional mission could interact with decisions about teacher appointment, academic promotion and selection of leaders to create an aligned governance system. Whether it has been adopted by any university anywhere in the world is another matter. Very few institutions can afford to exist with such singular focus; perhaps none.

8.7.2.2 A “Social’ (or Environmental) Orientation in All Students”. How Would We Know? Whether universities acknowledge it or not, they do influence students through their teaching. Whether this influence tends towards a “social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students” or the opposite is important to us, and likely to readers, particularly if the institution tells the world about its social impact, but either fails to monitor, measure, assess, evaluate or research this impact or having done so, discovers something less. An accepted tenet of educational development is that systematic improvement of something requires it to be measurable (Carnegie Foundation 2020). Measuring the social or environmental orientation of students was never going to be an easy task, but a great deal of research over several decades has focused on it. We know much about how to monitor, assess, evaluate and research the cognitive and affective elements of our students’ social and environmental orientation. The task may be inconvenient, perhaps even embarrassing if after a great deal of expended effort the results

References

are negative, but certainly not impossible. Our chapter on teaching provides some insights into this topic. Our chapter on community engagement continues this theme. This is also a key governance issue. Institutions chose which objectives to pursue and chose whether or not and how to evaluate the extent to which they are succeeding. They also choose whether to make their findings public or not and whether or not to say that they are doing something that they know they are not. These are all active governance choices, made by academic people, in governance positions. As you realise by now, I doubt that the universities that I know are able or willing to change in these ways. At present they make active choices not to. I have slightly less doubt about their ability and willingness to help our students to develop their own intellectual independence, or that universities’ current governance processes are capable of evolving in this direction. I also have some confidence that an internationally connected cohort of intellectually independent young people will have something interesting to say about their societies’ social and environmental justice. I have no doubt, personally, that the most important social purpose of our existing universities, and those still to be imagined, is the development of intellectual independence.

References Abel JR, Deitz R (2015) Agglomeration and job matching among college graduates. Reg Sci Urban Econ 51:14–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. regsciurbeco.2014.12.001 Barrie SC (2004) A research-based approach to generic graduate attributes policy. High Educ Res Dev 23:261– 275. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436042000235391 Bauer HH (1990) Barriers against interdisciplinarity: implications for studies of science, technology, and society. Sci Technol Hum Val 15(1):105–119 Boyer EL (1996) From scholarship reconsidered to scholarship assessed. Quest 48(2):129–139. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00336297.1996.10484184 Brown K, Connelly S, Lovelock B, Mainvil L, Mather D, Roberts H, Skeaff S, Shephard K (2019) Do we teach our students to share and to care? Res Post-Compuls Educ 24(4):462–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359674 8.2019.1654693

137 Brundiers K, Barth M, Cebrián G, Cohen M, Diaz L, Doucette-Remington S, Dripps W, Habron G, Harré N, Jarchow M, Losch K, Michel J, Mochizuki Y, Rieckmann M, Parnell R, Walker P, Zint M (2020) Key competencies in sustainability in higher education  – toward an agreed-upon reference framework. Sustain Sci 16(1):13–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11625-­020-­00838-­2 Bullin C (2018) To what extent has doctoral (PhD) education supported academic nurse educators in their teaching roles: an integrative review. BMC Nurs 17(1):6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-­018-­0273-­3 Carnegie Foundation (2020) The six core principles of improvement. Retrieved from www.carnegiefoundation.org/our-­ideas/six-­core-­principles-­improvement/ Cotton D, Bailey I, Warren M, Bissell S (2009) Revolutions and second-best solutions: education for sustainable development in higher education. Stud High Educ 34(7):719–733. https://doi. org/10.1080/03075070802641552 Dhawan NB, Belluigi DZ, Idahosa GE-O (2022) “There is a hell and heaven difference among faculties who are from quota and those who are non-quota”: under the veneer of the “new middle class” production of Indian public universities. High Educ 28:1–26. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10734-­022-­00932-­7 Fiselier ES, Fiselier E, Longhurst J, Gough G (2018) Exploring the current position of ESD in UK higher education institutions. Int J Sustain High Educ 19(2):393–412. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJSHE-­06-­2017-­0084 Frank P (2021) A proposal of personal competencies for sustainable consumption. Int J Sustain High Educ 22(6):1225–1245. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJSHE-­01-­2020-­0027 Kahan DM (2015) Climate-science communication and the measurement problem. Adv Polit Psychol 36(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12244 McCune V (2021) Academic identities in contemporary higher education: sustaining identities that value teaching. Teach High Educ 26(1):20–35. https://doi. org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1632826 Mukherjee R (1947) Ancient Indian education: Brahmanical and Buddhist. Mac Millan and Company, London NEP (2020) National education policy, 2020. Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, New Delhi Niedlich S, Bauer M, Doneliene M, Jaeger L, Rieckmann M, Bormann I (2020) Assessment of sustainability governance in higher education institutions  – a systemic tool using a governance equalizer. Sustainability 12(5):1816. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051816 Papaloizos A, Stiefel R (1971) The effectiveness of management teaching methods. Manag Decis 9(Summer):111–121 Percy C, Bhattacharya A (2021) Why higher education should take the ‘signalling critique’ seriously  – and what that might look like. Retrieved from https:// www.hepi.ac.uk/2021/10/19/why-­higher-­education-­ should-­t ake-­t he-­s ignalling-­c ritique-­s eriously-­a nd-­ what-­that-­might-­look-­like/

138 Ryan RM, Deci EL (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol 55:68–78 Scott G, Tilbury D, Sharp L, Deane E (2012) Turnaround leadership for sustainability in higher education. University of Western Sydney, Sydney Sethi A (2022) Reimagining vocational education. Retrieved from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ blogs/voices/reimagining-­vocational-­education/ Shephard K (2008) Higher education for sustainability: seeking affective learning outcomes. Int J Sustain High Educ 9(1):87–98. https://doi. org/10.1108/14676370810842201 Shephard K (2010) Higher education’s role in ‘education for sustainability’. Aust Univ Rev 52(1):13–22 Shephard K (2015) Higher education for sustainable development. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, p 131p. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137548412 Shephard K (2017) Discovering tertiary education through others’ eyes and words: exploring submissions to New Zealand’s review of its tertiary education sector. J High Educ Policy Manag 39(1): 4–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2016. 1254430 Shephard K (2022) On the educational difference between being able and being willing. In: Vare P, Lausselet N, Rieckmann M (eds) Competences in education for sustainable development. Springer International Publishing, pp  45–52. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­3-­030-­91055-­6_6 Shephard K (2023) Academic identity and “education for sustainable development”: a grounded theory. Front Educ 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc. 2023.1257119 Shephard K, Furnari M (2013) Exploring what university teachers think about education for sustainability. Stud High Educ 38(10):1577–1590. https://doi.org/10.1080 /03075079.2011.644784

8  Governance of Social Purpose Tolich M (2012) Sociology graduates require pathways, not employment destinations: the promise of experiential learning. N Z Sociol 27(2) Tolich M, Scarth B, Shephard K (2016) Teaching sociology students to become qualitative-­ researchers using an internship model of learner-support [application/pdf]. JSSE  – J Soc Sci Educ., 4-2015 Multiperspectivity, 53–63 Pages, 167 kB. https://doi. org/10.2390/JSSE-­V14-­I4-­1314 UNESCO (2021) Teachers have their say: motivation, skills and opportunities to teach education for sustainable development and global citizenship. Retrieved from https://www.ei-­ie.org/en/ item/25552:teachers-­have-­their-­say-­motivation-­skills-­ and-­opportunities-­to-­teach-­education-­for-­sustainable-­ development-­and-­global-­citizenship University of Otago (n.d.) The University of Otago graduate profile. Retrieved from https://www.otago.ac.nz/ courses/otago078325.html Wade BH, Stone JH (2010) Overcoming disciplinary and institutional barriers: an interdisciplinary course in economic and sociological perspectives on health issues. J Econ Educ 41(1):71–84 Watson C (2006) Narratives of practice and the construction of identity in teaching. Teach Teach 12(5):509– 526. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600600832213 Winter J, Cotton D, Hopkinson P, Grant V (2015) The university as a site for transformation around sustainability. Int J Innov Sustain Dev 9(3/4):303. https://doi. org/10.1504/IJISD.2015.071857 Winter J, Webb O, Turner R (2022) Decolonising the curriculum: a survey of current practice in a modern UK University. Innov Educ Teach Int. https://doi.org/10.1 080/14703297.2022.2121305 Wolf A, Jenkins A (2021) Managers and academics in a centralising sector. Retrieved from https://www. kcl.ac.uk/policy-­i nstitute/assets/managers-­a nd-­ academics-­in-­a-­centralising-­sector.pdf

9

Epilogue

9.1 A Brief Summary of the Ideas Developed in This Book Chapters in this book have attempted to describe some key issues relating to the social purposes of universities and to highlight differences in the perspectives of its two authors about how these purposes could be addressed. That universities do have social purposes and do attempt to address them is not contested. What they are, how they are caused, what universities do to address them, and with what success, are of great concern to authors and differences in focus need to be highlighted. In contexts of gender, class, caste, ethnicity, disability and rural/urban geographical location, chapters describe inequitable participation in higher education and diverse attempts to address equity through access, teaching, research, community engagement and governance. Chapters celebrate innovative practices in these contexts in many situations and highlight the efforts of institutions that have adopted specific social purposes, in India and more widely. Chapters also highlight the profound lack of measurement, monitoring, assessment, evaluation or research into the changes that innovative practices in these spaces may or may not be achieving. This epilogue provides authors with an opportunity to reflect on these considerations as the book comes to its end.

9.2 Kerry to Santha This has been a great conversation Santha, and I have learned lots about education, higher education, social purposes and myself on the way. I remember when you first contacted me, in 2019. I was on my way home to New Zealand from a conference in San Francisco (Comparative and International Education) that had focused on Education for Sustainable Development, emphasised its challenges and made strong links to the sustainable development goals and universities’ contributions to achieving them; but dismally failed to express any interest in monitoring, measuring, assessing, evaluating or researching how well universities were doing in these regards, in the context of student learning. I returned home feeling, as usual, that universities, and most university people, were not taking sustainability seriously. Your email, and its link to Azim Premji University, suggested that you, and your institution, were. Even so, our work has highlighted the challenges rather than the solutions. While considering the origins and roles of universities in Chap. 2, for example, we explored UNESCO’s hopes for higher education and emphasised how they focused on contribution to societal change, not reproduction of societies in their current form. But this focus was troublesome in its inconsistency. We asked (in Chap. 2)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7_9

139

140 But how does intellectual independence, as a fundamental feature of university education, equate to the social purposes of universities, as identified in our previous paragraph that addressed UNESCO’s section 148 (UNESCO, 1995, 3)? UNESCO advocates, for example, that universities should be “-a place of learning founded on quality and knowledge alone …” but goes on to add, in the same clause, “… which inculcates, particularly in the minds of its future graduates, commitment to the pursuit of knowledge and a sense of responsibility to place training at the service of social development”.

9 Epilogue

with market forces and government policies working against them. We saw great potential, but huge challenges that mimic those in conventional universities, and we struggled to suggest ways to protect universities with specific social purposes from the same external and internal pressures that afflict, or benefit, conventional universities. On the way, Santha, you and I gradually got to grips with the specificity of specific social purpose. At an early stage we identified the dramatic Many chapters later, perhaps we could conclude and commendable multiplicity of universities’ that section 148 is simply too generalised. social purposes and agreed that social purpose Perhaps UNESCO wants ‘inculcation’ via teach- exists in some form in every aspect of university ing but change via research? Perhaps these are functioning. But we struggled to be specific about simply euphemisms, as everyone realises that what most concerned us. Eventually, perhaps universities are inherently biased towards frustrated by my pedantry in seeking clarity research, so that mutually exclusive teaching-­ about our book’s title, and function, you highrelated aims and objectives simply do not matter lighted (in Chap. 8) and that it is OK to promise good things and Creating a ‘social’ (or environmental) orientation equally OK to ignore them. On this basis, perin all students who attend all HEIs. haps universities simply have too many roles for (... along with some other specific social purposes any coherent entity to address. designed to widen access to higher education). In critiquing conventional universities, we went on to explore such challenges in more That social (or environmental) orientation is to be detail. We explored how universities select their achieved by all those who attend our higher edustudents, their particular teaching focus, their cation institutions, is of course also at the heart of research emphases and their style of community the Education for Sustainable Development engagement. We considered universities’ pro- movement, but which has struggled to define it cesses for selecting and promoting their staff and during many decades of trying. It is also essenhow a focus on economic prosperity or academic tially the same as UNESCO’s “... sense of responpriorities, rather than, say, the sustainable devel- sibility to place training at the service of social opment goals, exists as key drivers for these development... ”; a similarly ill-defined purpose actions. We never doubted the positive social (in my view) and itself inherently conflicted with benefits accrued by some from the collective other purposes. Readers should be clear that you efforts of our universities, but did doubt if these and I have profoundly different views on whether benefits reached the parts of our societies that or not it is possible, or appropriate, for universimost needed them. We wondered if, perhaps, the ties to simultaneously attempt to teach their studecisions made by academic groups were forced dents to be intellectually independent, and to on them by governments, and so represented bar- teach them any particular values-­ based riers to be overcome, but rather concluded that orientation. academics everywhere make choices, often to Our conversations have addressed concerns acquiesce to governmental steering. Choices may that such objectives, along with those designed to be difficult, and collective, rather than easy and make higher education available even for those individual, of course, but choices are made. who have not successfully completed schooling At each stage we explored the wonderful work in remote or deprived areas, or for underprividone by universities that have adopted specific leged people, lead to dumbing-down of standards social purposes, often against the odds, often and so are incompatible with the pursuit of aca-

9.2  Kerry to Santha

demic excellence and economic prosperity. After three years of conversation, we appear no nearer defining this “‘social’ (or environmental) orientation in all students who attend all HEIs.” or agreeing how to create, or achieve, such a thing. Higher education, and the peer review processes that steer it, appear to me to be irrevocably committed to scientific and technological development, and improvements in national innovation and productivity. Perhaps there is some hope from the recent changes in ways that research impact is being measured in some nations (notably the UK), but continued separation of impact judgements from quality judgements suggests to me that the institution of higher education is far from the caring organisation that it claims to be. But what of my own learning? It was while I was reading for our chapter on community engagement that I had to confront some of my own affective, emotional, feelings about what we are writing about. Social justice is clearly not a thing to be defined, like the mass of a planet, or the wavelength of green light. The idea of justice, like fairness, is hard to know and even tougher to pass on to others unmolested by its journey within us, but is nonetheless deeply felt, perhaps particularly where we perceive it to be lacking. The idea that it should be available, or proportioned, to all, is inherently democratic, until we analyse the meaning of democracy itself and find that is also a prickly thing to grasp. I am still in a state of shock that slightly more than 50 % of those who voted took the UK out of the European Union, depriving a young British generation of the European citizenship that they had grown up with. This is not the form of democracy that the world will need to grasp if it is to achieve the sustainable development goals, most particularly for those who do not make up the majority in their own countries. Reluctantly I find myself doubting some democratic ideals and falling back on an equally flawed ideological approach to proportioning resources; meritocracy. I have no doubt that I despise aspects of this deeply contested philosophy, or that it represents a means whereby those with privilege seek to maintain it. But nor do I doubt its presence within me, inculcated by my parents, friends and social upbring-

141

ings since birth and, no doubt, reinforced by my experiences in universities. Meritocracy is inherent to the rules of the game played by university people. Learning that I am something that I do not want to be, has been challenging for me, but it has been one consequence of our conversation over these past 3  years. I have also re-learned what I already suspected. Universities, everywhere in the world where I have travelled, are elitist organisations, set on maintaining the privilege that university people were born into. University people may not realise this. They may deny it. Some may be exceptions. But it is there. I do wonder if it may also be why university people feel so free to promise one thing, but consistently fail to monitor, measure, assess, evaluate or research the extent to which their promises are realised. Perhaps that is one of the perks of privilege; for many a hard-one privilege and one to be guarded jealously, but anathema to our quest for social justice. I remain convinced that HE cannot do everything that it tells the world it is trying to do. In trying to do so much it fails to do some things well and, in the process, undermines its own credibility with respect to social purpose. With sustainability in mind, societies need to reconsider the roles of higher education. It seems to me that much relates to the oxymoron of sustainable development. Focussing first on the development part of sustainable development, I do not doubt the positive contributions that education makes to economic prosperity and so potentially to human development. Development due to the efforts of higher education may not be equitable, based on gender, caste, class or geographical distribution, but for many (humans) it is positive. On average, humans live longer nowadays than historically. They overcome viral pandemics and feed themselves. Democracy tends to address the hopes and needs of the majority and the majority do well out of higher education. India surely provides the best example of this. A significant proportion of people in India live middle-class lives, leaving many who do not, and for whom many of our sustainable development goals appear purpose built. How much of this development is sustainable, the other part of sustainable

9 Epilogue

142

development, is another matter. Sustainability is, of course, a highly contested term but if we, for the sake of argument, use the sustainable development goals as our yardstick of sustainability we might reasonably worry that universities’ contributions are not only inadequate, but possibly even counter-productive. Even if we focus only on the social justice elements of the sustainable development goals, we should express concern about higher education’s contribution to the lives of women and to poorer and disadvantaged people everywhere in the world. With a few exceptions, our conversations and explorations over the past 3  years have raised my concerns about the culpability of universities in these respects, not lessened them. Our book has not been about environmental justice, and perhaps this is just as well as universities’ record in this regard may be even more problematic. Agricultural production has clearly benefited from the science and technology that comes from our universities, but so has soil salinization, climate change, deforestation and habitat fragmentation. From my perspective, however, all is not lost. While I doubt the resolve of university people, including you and I, to address all of the problems of the world, I cannot doubt the capacity of young people everywhere to take control of their planet and of its human infrastructure and take humanity in a different direction. While others call for the repurposing of higher education, my own analysis now suggests that only modest change is necessary, in that it should target the achievement of universities’ current principal purpose. A focus on intellectual independence creates, in my mind at least, opportunities to address the principal aim of higher education internationally, without losing higher education’s clear impact on nations’ economies. But before we get to the end of this book I have a question for you, Santha. I know that you had hoped to get something in particular from our conversation, perhaps focusing on what universities with specific social purposes could do to distinguish them from conventional universities and enable them to survive and contribute effectively to social justice. How has that gone for you?

9.3 Santha to Kerry Though I established my career as a social scientist interested in issues of environment and natural resources, public organisations, institutions and governance, my shift to the Azim Premji University was driven more by an urge to make a change in the real world. The promise of the university to create reflective practitioners in the domains of education and development attracted me. I understood from the beginning that such a university would require changes in my practices as a teacher and researcher. My work and the life in the university gave me two not-so-expected experiences. First is a positive one. Though I was doubtful whether there would be enough demand for development practitioners in the real world to meet the job requirement of our students, our experience was promising. More than 90 percent of our students who seek a job get one in one or other development organisation with a salary which is comparable to an entry-level position in governments in India. Second experience is a negative one: The university faces severe challenges in orienting its teachers to change their practices of teaching and research so that these become appropriate for the creation of development practitioners. Here I took an activist role. One is to try to develop certain practices on my own to make teaching and research a lot more useful to practitioners. Secondly to argue for the need to change these practices within my academic community. I have never taken up a leadership position in my university. Instead, I take an activist’s position advocating for certain changes. As part of this activist role, I have also studied other universities which aimed at specific social purposes and tried to understand their successes and failures. These have also informed my advocacy for changing practices to make these suitable for the creation of reflective practitioners in the domain development. My impressions (and not research-based insights) based on this activist experience for a few years are the following: (a) Certain changes in the practices of universities, which make them more effective in terms of the requirements of the

9.3  Santha to Kerry

specific social purposes, are possible; These are mentioned in the chapters on teaching, research and community engagement of this book (b) However there will be a persistence of certain kinds of challenges in these universities which may work against the achievement of social purposes; (c) The balance between a and b may depend on the sustained interest of the leadership and the availability of enough financial resources to pursue social purposes. I felt the need to bring this experience into the discourse on higher education in general. That was my motivation to contact Kerry and suggest the writing of this book. To me Kerry is an experienced scholar and researcher on higher education. To me, he also represents the ‘good’ aspects of conventional university. As an individual, I thought that though he would disagree with many of my impressions and ways of writing and argumentation, he would have the openness to listen to what I say. I thought that a dialogue between the two of us would be useful to understand the issue of the social purposes of the universities deeply and critically. All these expectations turned out to be correct in the writing of this joint book. How do I see the future of universities and their social purposes, as my input to this epilogue? Probably I may not share some of the views of Kerry in this regard. This may be due to my professional background as an economist. I see (certain) universities doing very well (even if not based on what these universities claim). There is a huge demand to get admissions in such universities. Most people who pass out get decent jobs and higher salaries. Probably employers may not be looking at what students have studied in the universities but look at only their institution’s reputation/ranking. There is a huge competition to be the members of faculty in such universities. They publish articles in top-­ quality journals to get jobs and promotions. Some of them get coveted prizes. Reputed and not-so-­ reputed and poor-quality universities all are part of a single ladder. Those at the lower end want to go up in the ladder; some may succeed but most fail and remain at the lower end. Many developing/poorer countries have more universities of the latter kind.

143

Hence, I would argue that there is a certain close connection between what universities actually do, and what is expected from them in the markets. Universities deliver according to market expectations. Some provide better quality, some provide not so good quality, and some serve global markets; some serve local markets; some are pricey and others are cheaper. Hence there is a variety of universities meeting a variety of demand from the market. Here there is a connection between universities and the institutional setting in which these actually function. In fact, I am not really perturbed by the disconnection between the normative claims of these universities and their institutional settings which create outcomes which are not in tune with these claims. There is a reason for me to take such an approach. Reforming all universities to make them contribute to different social purposes, though desirable, could be an onerous task. I am not sure whether I am understanding all the determinants of their problems. Though Kerry is interested in that agenda, and I am sympathetic to that purpose, I should admit that my capabilities and interest in this respect are limited. Secondly, I have written books about a set of social problems including ill-governance and corruption. In my view, many of these social problems have structural causes. Social change may be needed to address these structural causes and there may not be a linear connection between such a change and the mitigation of these problems. My sense, even though this may not be shared by Kerry, is that some of the ills of conventional universities have such causes. Though I am an activist, I am a lot more pragmatic. All these make me focus on a small set of universities which have specific social purposes. However, my sense is that if some of these universities succeed in terms of their stated purposes, it may have a positive externality/impact on higher education in general. That is why I am more interested in a small set of universities which have specific social purposes. As an institutional economist, my impression is that universities with specific social purposes do not have an institutional context that is connected to their purpose. Or there is a contradiction between the purposes and institutional

144

settings. There is a need to change this disconnection. We have highlighted this disconnection in different chapters of this book including governance, research and teaching. I am not presuming that such a connection between universities which focus on specific social purposes and institutional setting can be achieved in a mechanistic way through organisational design/stitching. It may have to happen through articulations, discussions and deliberative actions. These have to be part of informed social experiments. Shouldn’t these experiments be evaluated and researched, and without it, how do we know whether these experiments are successful or not? Yes, I agree with Kerry that there has to be a lot more research into the actual practices of these universities. However, this research may need to use a variety of instruments like multivariate analysis or randomised control trials. Qualitative and quantitative approaches may have to be used. However, I would argue that these experiments also require a lot more critical reflection (including self-reflection). Those who are involved in these experiments may have to be a lot more open to information/data that is counter to their preconceived notions. Changing universities to make them capable to meet specific social needs has to be part of a reflective practice.

9.4 Kerry to Santha We clearly agree on much. Institutions that focus on some specific social purposes clearly do have a role and we both hope that more conventional universities will learn from them, via the research on their successes and failures that we both agree needs to be undertaken within them. We certainly agree that this research into practice needs to be fit for purpose and be designed to match the circumstances in which it operates, and that current ways to determine the quality of research will likely not enable this research to be acknowledged. The academic discipline of education is certainly capable of such a task, although whether such research will be funded, who will initiate it and manage it, and how it will be ‘made public’ are clearly still contested issues and subject to the

9 Epilogue

same peer review processes that manage so much else in our universities. But I still doubt the efficacy of this plan. Your own research and consultancy efforts, reported in this book, have identified that many of the barriers to change in these universities are the same as in other universities; perhaps even greater as most of these special institutions are somewhat far down the pecking order of higher education institutions, are not funded well, and tend not to have a high propensity to do research of any kind. The odds appear to me to be stacked against your plan, but like the Plan A of advocates for ESD (teaching young people how to be sustainable), I wish it well. In the meantime, perhaps as many as 50% of the young people from our nations continue to attend institutions that say one thing and do another, and learn that approach is not only OK, but the best way to get on in the world. Much of my writing attempts to analyse, and to critique ESD Plan A. Your plan leaves most of the universities of the world to simply get on with their hegemonic social purpose of reproducing the values of their sponsoring societies, enlarging the middle classes, ignoring the plight of those less well-off by sex, income or geographical position, and accepting the continued environmental degradation of our planet. The problems that our book is about are not being solved by our universities, but may be caused by them. I do think that all of higher education needs to be part of the change that will come. I hope that your institutions with specific social purposes will contribute to that change, even lead it, but at present I cannot see how your plan will have that result. As I see it, our universities have created a sort of treadmill for our young people. Getting on in life, as in living in the most desirable areas, and getting the best health care, perhaps even marrying the most desirable partner, certainly achieving an adequate income to afford all of this, depends on getting into the best university. Many universities are way down in rankings, and although getting into them may be easier, the benefits to those who do may be poor; even negative in comparison with not going to university at all. Getting into the best universities depends on doing well at school, which depends, of course,

9.4  Kerry to Santha

on living in the most desirable areas and having the most supportive and economically-capable parents. In many parts of the developing world, such benefits are afforded by very few. Universities, primarily through their monopoly on credentials, hold the key to an individual’s future prosperity. But much in this argument depends on our students being pawns in the process. Perhaps some have been, and continue to be so, but the core task of higher education is to make this less so. Intellectually independent people may choose to be pawns, but their independence gives them options to not be. Although I often suggest that higher education needs to work harder on developing the intellectual independence of its students, there is no doubt that this operates to a degree now, likely in every university in the world, to a degree. Some students do rebel against ‘the treadmill’. Some students succeed in using their higher education experience not only to excel in disciplinary contexts, but also to learn a wide range of skills and dispositions, aptitudes if you will, that set them apart from the many who do not, or choose not to. Perhaps an increasing proportion express dissatisfaction with social and environmental injustices that appear to be condoned by their governments, universities and parents. Perhaps some even notice the disparity between what their institutions say and what they do. Some of our existing students do develop a ‘bullshit detector’ whilst with us. I would dearly like to see more do so. If they use it to subsequently ‘feather their own nests’, so be it. I am confident that many will use it for greater purposes. Our problem at present, I suggest, is that we know too little about intellectual independence, how to teach it and how to recognise it if we come across it. It is not our priority, but it should be. I am also confident that Information and Computing Technology (ICT), social media and eLearning will transform what our students learn. Some years ago, I wrote that the best thing about eLearning was that it freed students, and students’ learning, from their teachers. Whether university teachers intend it or not, it is becoming progressively more challenging to turn our students into clones of ourselves. Students no longer

145

depend on academics to access the knowledge that they need to pass our exams, and pass them well. Students no longer rely on us for the learning experiences they need to acquire the higher order cognitive skills and dispositions that many are capable of. In many parts of the world, students no longer attend our lectures like they used to. They do not need to. Much now depends on how we react. Our current assessment processes are being stretched to address the changes. Will we respond further by enforcing attendance and learning on our terms? Or will we accept that things have gone too far away from that, and do our best to provide learning experiences for those that need them, particularly experiences that enhance their independence, and celebrate their successes? Most important of all, will we have the nerve to maintain our standards, or even increase them, in the face of so much pressure to dumb down? I do hope so. We have much to learn about how best to support our students as they learn to be intellectually independent. Now is not the time to respond to pressures from parents, governments and societies to ensure that all who enter higher education succeed, by lowering our own aspirations and hopes for them. If our principal aim really is to develop intellectually independent young people, we surely need to be hard on them and on ourselves and maintain high expectations. I say ‘ourselves’ because while we can no longer afford to aim to turn our students into clones of ourselves, nor can we afford to continue to appoint, and prepare, university teachers as clones of ourselves. In our day, we may have been excellent at teaching our students the disciplinary content to become disciplinary experts, but that should no longer be our main task. Aiming for more intellectual independence will require a different brand of university teacher. Hopefully peer review, and its flip side, academic freedom, will remain cornerstones of academia, but peers of the future need to be open to new manifestations of quality judgements about teaching and learning, and about research quality and research impact. This is happening, but slowly. By selecting the next generation of university teachers with this in mind, we can make it

146

change faster, and enable higher education to catch up with societies’ needs. Our chapter on research suggested the start of something like this; with the development of extrinsic motivation for research to have social impact, and the fact that peer review appears to be driving this. Striving for intellectual independence should not be a major change for higher education. Doing it bit by bit will be fine, as long as we research our practices on the way, just to check that we are moving in the right direction. I was impressed when I first heard of a university in India that set its main task as preparing reflective practitioners. I was even more impressed when I learned that not only did most graduates choose socially important jobs in this context, but also that some university people were confident of their abilities to teach in these regards, and in the large scale, educational, experience-based processes that supported such aspirations at an institutional level. For me, reflection requires experiences to reflect on and there is much that links reflection, to critical reflection, to critical thinking and so on to intellectual independence. I am challenged to imagine how truly reflective people could avoid also being intellectually independent to a large degree; noting that intellectual independence does not necessarily dictate the decisions that circumstances force on people. For me, any university that goes out of its way to support such learning as a priority is potentially a guiding light for all others. The university in question is not one of India’s most prestigious, elite institutions, but a relatively new independent university. All good. We have explored much about this university’s efforts, and those of other institutions that have adopted specific social purposes, in this book. But I am still an advocate for university research and sceptical of institutional promises and claims that are not supported by something more. Most of the institutional research that I see at present in Aotearoa New Zealand, and in the UK, consists of surveys of our students’ views about their teachers and teaching. Little of it is subject to peer review, or the rigours associated with seeking publication in peer-

9 Epilogue

reviewed journals. Much of it is atheoretical in conception and deficient in methodological origins. Its purpose may not primarily be to improve our understanding of what happens in higher education, but rather to placate the concerns of those who express concern about what happens in higher education. I still question and doubt the quality of all research, but I doubt the quality of some claims more than others. I still feel that peer review, flawed as it may be, is a significant indicator of quality. Without it, universities manage to make promises and claims that might appear rational and forward looking, but that are in reality both deceitful and irresponsible. The discipline of education is quite capable of saying much about the quality of education, and about the outcomes of educational interventions, even though often its approaches appear bizarre to academics from other disciplines. I have no doubt that novel research approaches will be needed to explore that nature of higher education that will take us towards the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, but also no doubt that we, academics, can do far better than we do at present in researching, and understanding, our own practices in these regards. For your university to be the guiding light that it might be, it does need to research its practices in ways that others in higher education will respect. Claims supported by institutional research that is neither peer reviewed nor published in peer-reviewed publications are unlikely to have the impact that they deserve. Our book has helped me, perhaps both of us, to rationalise the nature of universities’ efforts towards social justice. Of course, all universities have social purposes and make some contributions to social justice, in particular by stimulating economies and preparing young people to take up jobs. But if universities fail to address the educational and cultural aspirations of women, those socio-economically disadvantaged, those in geographically isolated areas and those whose ethnicities disadvantage them if higher education is fixated on the majority’s knowledge systems, they not only fail to address aspirations inherent

9.5  Santha to Kerry

to the sustainable development goals, they work against them. Although much in this domain depends on government interventions (such as establishing new universities in remote areas irrespective of cost efficiency), the assertion of academic freedom through peer review will surely need to adapt (as it appears to be doing in the UK in the context of research impact). And then we have the awesome expectation that somehow higher education will contribute to change on a societal level by ensuring that all students leave us with an orientation, or mindset, compatible with social justice and the achievement of the SDGs. Noting that you and I promised readers that we would end the book with more agreement than we started with, and that I maintain my focus on intellectual independence and you on institutions with specific social purpose, we do need to focus our attention on potential compatibility between our stances. It seems to me that much relates to the precise nature of the reflective abilities and dispositions that your university’s reflective practitioners achieve. Another way of looking at this is to ask whether intellectually independent people, critical thinkers, and reflective practitioners are more likely than others to be disposed to consider social and environmental justice in the life decisions that they make. You and I started on this task with valued colleagues from several nations1 and agreed that the task was important, but complex. Our research emphasised that the research questions that higher education researchers can reasonably ask are limited by the research methods and methodologies open to us, and acceptable to higher education peers. Measuring the unmeasurable comes to mind. Quite impossible of course, but without it we are doomed to live with claims and counterclaims peddled by higher education institutions with their own agendas. Shephard, K., Kalsoom, Q., Gupta, R., Probst, L., Gannon, P., Santhakumar, V., Ndukwe, I. G., & Jowett, T. (2021). Exploring the relationship between dispositions to think critically and sustainability concern in HESD.  International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 22(5), 1166–1185. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJSHE-07-2020-0251 1 

147

9.5 Santha to Kerry Our differences are narrowing down. But ‘education as a treadmill’ is not important for the majority of youngsters in countries like India. Since the enrolment in HE is only about 25 percent, three-­ fourths of the population of each age cohort are outside of it. Since the number of good quality universities which can ensure a passage to a reasonably better life is small, the majority of those who enter the HE are also out of this treadmill. Hence those who are part of this treadmill could be much less than 5 percent of youngsters of each age cohort. This may be true in many developing/ poorer countries. Whether this 5 percent become intellectually independent is a good question. Yes, some of them may become so, through what they learn at university, a few others may be getting that through social/peer learning (including e-­ learning), and so on. It may be possible to improve the practices in these good universities so that a few more people become intellectually independent. In my view the possibility of an increase in income could be a much more socially-impactful outcome of these ‘good’ universities (since intellectual independence of fewer than 5 percent may not make that much impact in society). Not out of any disagreement with you, but due to practical considerations, I am not willing to devote that much time or effort to this agenda. I am also thinking about a small set of universities with specific social purposes (or a small share of students) but here the objective is to have a higher level of positive externalities beyond what these students get for themselves. Thinking about these universities is a more viable agenda for me. As we have discussed, I have no reason to think that orienting students to specific social purposes will work against their intellectual independence. In fact, a reflective practitioner should be an autonomous thinker and actor but informed adequately to carry out effective actions in society to make a change (if he/she thinks that such a change is necessary). As I have been arguing with you through this book, the binding constraint in

148

my view in India in this regard is the absence of appropriate learning experiences in conventional universities. The real challenge in universities with specific social purposes is in the creation of such learning experiences, and the lack of orientation of faculty (who are trained in conventional universities) towards that goal. Regarding research into such matters, my point is the following. Let us think about poverty eradication or sustainable development or other social goals. Research is important in terms of these social purposes. However, many countries have not reduced poverty significantly or achieved a significant contribution to the SDG, and this is not due to the lack of research. This is due to the lack of adequate social processes, which may include an empowered civil society and citizenship, lack of public discussions, and not enough questioning of political leaders. In my mind, the orientation of universities towards social purpose is also a similar problem. Research is important but on its own it is not adequate. There has to be a lot more critical reflection of practices and self, there have to be a lot more free

9 Epilogue

and frank discussions, and there has to be a lot more social pressure. I see our book as an input to these social processes which are needed to orient universities towards social purposes. Despite all of these differences, perhaps this final section is the place for us to emphasise what we agree on. We both agree that students need to have learning experiences to reflect on so as to learn. If Universities are serious about their social purposes they need to provide their students with relevant experiences. Sitting in classrooms is not enough. And as reflection on practice is not easy, students need to be taught how to do it and rewarded with grades for doing it well. We both agree that universities need to research their practices, but that the types of research and the publication processes that enable this need to be fit for purpose. Current research enablers such as funding, research methodologies, and publication processes need to change. We both agree that processes for recruiting, developing, and rewarding university academics need to change. Let us finish our book on these positive agreements.

Index

A Academic autonomy, 126 Academic committees, 126 Academic domains, 77 Academic freedom, vii, 83, 125–126 Academic identity, 131 Academic mission statements, 123 Academic skills, 55 Academic urgency, 15 Admission, 84 Adult and Community Education, 47 Adult and continuing education, 97 Adult Education, 47 Affirmative action, 124 Afghanistan, 4 Age, 37 Agha Khan Foundation, 2 Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), 48 Anticipatory thinking, 135 Anti-essentialist approaches to development, 58 Antifoundational practices, 98 Aotearoa New Zealand, v, 40 Assessment plan, 64 Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education, 111 Assumption, 99, 110 Attitude, 55 Audiences, 101 Australia, 43 Australian Universities Review, 125 Azim Premji University, xvii, 5 B Banaras Hindu University (BHU), 48 Bangladesh, 4 Bateson, G., 115 Beaconhouse National University, 27 Biodiversity, 59

Bolivia, 5 Bourdieu, P., 28 Brazil, 5 Brookfield, S.D., 108 Buddhism, 4 C Capitalism, 3 Carnegie Foundation, 136 Caste, 37 Caste discrimination, 129 Category A students, 62 Category B students, 62 Category C students, 62 China, 4 Chinese academics, 81 Choices, 140 Christian missionaries, 48 Civics education, 55 Class, 37 Clients, 101 Climate change, 142 Coercive measures, 96 Collaborative learning, 115 Collegiate higher education, 117 Colombia, 5 Community education, 59 Community engagement, 55 Competence, 57, 110 Competency, 57 Competition, 56, 115 Contact Theory, 99 Continuing Education, 58 Critic and conscience of society, 91 Critical thinking, 58, 106 Cultural and linguistic relativism, 113–114 Cultural expectations, 114 Cultural relativism, 75

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 K. Shephard, V. Santhakumar, Universities with a Social Purpose, Sustainable Development Goals Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8960-7

149

Index

150 D Dartmouth College Environmental Studies Africa Foreign Study Program, 93 DEAL model, 99 Decolonisation, 114 Defecation, 76 Deficit models of learning, 97 Deforestation, 142 Degree-granting institutions, 128 Delhi University, 6 Democracy, 141 Democratic, 40 Democratic Party, 80 Development practitioners, 142 Development studies, 58 Disability, 37 Disadvantaged people, 142 Disciplines, 56 Dispositions, 55 Dispositions to think critically, 113 Dowry, 86

G Gandhi, M.K., 48 Gender, 37, 105 Gender equality, 59 Geographical differences in development, 59 Geographical position, 144 Global citizenship, 55, 130 Global perspective, 130 Globalization, 13 Governance, 17 Governance equaliser, 136 Graduate attributes, 55, 130 Graduateness, 55 Graduate premium, 125 Greenhouse gas emission, 59 Green revolution, 80 Group-think, 106 Guiding light, 146 Guilt, 58 Gujarat Vidyapeeth., 12 Gujarat Vidyapith, 5

E Early Childhood Education (ECE), 21 Economic prosperity, 78, 123 Economics in Action, 63 Economies of scale, 43 Education and Training Act (2020), 107 Education for sustainability, 56 Education for sustainable development, 56 Elite sections of society, 1 Empirical research, 76 Employers, 143 Employment opportunities, 134 Environmental degradation, 59 Environmental education, 56 Environmental health, 123 Environmental literacy, 130 Epistemic authority, 109 Epistemic position, 110 Epistemological and ontological basis, 133 ESD Plan A, 120 Essentialism, 58 Ethics, 130 Ethnicity, 37 Ethnocentrism, 113 Europe, 1

H Habitat fragmentation, 142 Harari, Y.N., 106 Heuristic shortcuts, 106 Hidden curriculum, 117 Hierarchically differentiated market-driven HE system, 52 High expectations, 145 Higher Education, 20 Hinduism, 4 Human development, 3 Humanities, 127 Humboldt, 24

F Facione, P.A., 108 First-generation students, 31, 60 Fish, S., 15, 98 Fukuyama, F., 112 Funding, 148 Further Education, 20

I Impact, 83 Impact assessment, 88 India, 4, 45 Indian Institute of Science, 85 Indigenous people, 81 Individualism, 112–113 Information and Computing Technology (ICT), 145 Institute of Rural Management, 5 Institution of higher education, 123 Institutional responsibility, 91 Instrumental, 58 Intellectual autonomy, 113 Intellectual independence, 58 Intellectuals, 75 Interdisciplinary learning, 129 International conferences, 78 International journals, 78 International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED), 20

Index Internship, 130 Intrapersonal factors, 133 Islam, 4 J Jamia Millia Islamia, 48 Jawaharlal Nehru, 48 K Kashi Vidyapith, 5 Kerala, xvii Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP), ix, 23 Key skills, 55 Knowledge illusion, 106 Knowledge production, 79 Knowledge systems, 82 Knowledge transfer, 78 L Land Grant Universities, 58 Latin America, 12 Learning objectives for the SDGs, 60 Level 11 learning, 116 Level 111 learning, 116 Levels of learning, 116 Liberal education, 2 Liberalism, 112 Limited resources, 127 Local challenges, 80 Lower castes, 76 M Mahatma Gandhi, 5 Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapith, 22 Māori, 23, 40 Maori Strategic Framework, 34 mātauranga Māori, 35 Meaningful education, 56 Merit, 133 Meritocracy, 141 Meritocratic, 40 Mexico, 5 Mezirow, J., 29 Microeconomics, 63 Middle classes, 144 Mindset, 99 Monash Rural Medical Programme, 46 Multicultural, 82 Multiculturalism, 82 Multiple disciplinary perspectives, 110 Myanmar, 4

151 N National and international policy, 123 National Dairy Development Board (NDDB), 8 National Education Policy, 73 Natural sciences, 126 Nepal, 4 New Education Policy, 32 Newman, J.H., 26 Non-elite universities, 1 Non-governmental organisations, 88 Normative thinking, 135 Norm-referenced, 115 P Pacifica, 40 Pacific Strategic Framework, 34 Pakistan, 4 Parameswaran, M.P. (MP), ix Participation, 37–52 Partners, 101 Patrilocal residence, 86 Peer review, 126 Peer-reviewed journals, 130 People’s Science Movement (PSM), 23, 103 Performance-based research fund (PBRF), 84, 123 Personal freedoms, 58 Phenomenographic study, 97 Philippines, 4 Polytechnics, 128 Post-graduate education, 22 Post-modernism, 75 Poverty, 3 Practitioners, 75 Primary Education, 21 Privilege, 58 Professional education, 2, 118 Professional values, 2 Publication processes, 148 Public goods, 78 Public intellectuals, 91 Q Quality Evaluation, 84 Quota, 133 R Race, 105 Ranking, 143 Ranking of universities, 2 Rational analysis, 106 Real-world sustainability challenges, 93 Real-world urgency, 15 Redbrick Universities, 58 Reflection on experience, 97

Index

152 Reflective critique, 101 Reflective practitioners, 95, 142 Religious elites, 1 Republican Party, 80 Reputation, 143 Research, 74 Research Excellence Framework (REF), 83 Research-led academics, 132 Research methodologies, 148 Research subjects, 101 Reservation, 124 Resource for change, 58 Responsibility, 130 Rounder Sense of Purpose project, 60 Rural areas, 45 Rural India, 87 Rural Management, 2 Ruskin College, 5 S Samoa, 93 Scheduled Tribes, 22 Scholarship, 16 Scholarship of Engagement, 58 Scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), 58, 79 School teachers, 75 Science education, 109 Scriven, M., 107 SDG#4, 56 Secondary education, 21 Self, 115 Self-determination theory (SDT), 131 Sewage pits, 76 Sexual-orientation, 37 Single loop and double loop learning, 99 Skills, 55 Sleight of hand, 57 Social change, 82 Social context, 64 Social inequalities, 41 Social justice, 105 Social mobility, 37–52, 133 Social (or environmental) orientation, 124 Social purpose, 85 Social responsibility, 55 Social sciences, 126 Society for Research into Higher Education, 41 Socioeconomic status, 37 Sociologists, 130 Soil salinization, 142 Specific social purposes, 88 Sri Lanka, 4 Stakeholders, 82 Student-centredness, 111 Students from poorer families, 119 Sustainable development goals (SDGs), v, 26, 56 Systematic thinking, 135

T Talloires Declaration, 92 Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), 5 Teacher-training programs, 2 Teaching-only academics, 132 Technical fixes, 105 Te Pūkenga, 24 Tertiary education, 20 The Institute of Rural Management, Anand (IRMA), 7 Theories of reasoned action and planned behaviour, 133 Times Higher Education, 39 Times Higher Education Impact Rankings, 26 Transdisciplinary course design, 93 Transferable skills, 55 Transformative university learning experiences, 93 Treadmill, 147 Tuition fees, 24 U Uganda, 92 Undergraduate education, 22 Underprivileged families., 3 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 20, 82 Units of assessment (UOAs), 83 Universal Intellectual Values, 109 Universities NZ, 34 Universities with specific social purposes, 120 University Entrance qualifications, 24 University Extension, 25 University Grants Commission (UGC), 5 University Leaders for a Sustainable Future, 92 University of Auckland, 34 University of Baroda, 6 University of Bologna, 24 University of Brasilia, 5, 9 University of California, 6 University of Central Asia, 2 University of Central Asia (UCA), 66 University of Otago, xvii, 34 University-Practice Connect, 87 Upper castes, 76 USA Supreme Cour, 39 V Va, 114 vā knowledge ecology, 114 Validation mechanism, 80 Values, 105 Varghese Kurien, 7 W Wānanga, 7 Widening participation, 30–31 Working-class students, 31 Worldviews, 82