Pub Date : 2020-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2019.1702088
Andreas Kjær Stage
ABSTRACT National university systems have traditionally been characterised by major differences in both internal structures and external conditions. However, the global rise of the knowledge economy has made external conditions of universities more similar across countries. This paper investigates to what extent this convergence has been mirrored within the universities by systematically comparing staff changes over more than a decade in five countries: The United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Norway, and Denmark. Measures of staff changes are partial but tangible indicators, which are reasonably comparable across countries and over time. The empirical analysis isolates and examines two parallel staff trends, which the higher education literature currently highlights as crucial for ongoing university transformations: Proliferation of temporary academic staff and professionalisation of administrative/managerial staff. In doing so, the analysis provides a tangible empirical basis for assessing the impact of global trends on historically distinct university systems. Staff compositions have changed in the same direction, but from different starting points and with different intensity. Staff changes have been larger in Europe than in the US, but not in ways erasing major historical differences. The directional similarity rather suggests that dissimilar universities have added a similar layer of certain types of human resources.
{"title":"Are national university systems becoming more alike? Long-term developments in staff composition across five countries","authors":"Andreas Kjær Stage","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2019.1702088","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2019.1702088","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT National university systems have traditionally been characterised by major differences in both internal structures and external conditions. However, the global rise of the knowledge economy has made external conditions of universities more similar across countries. This paper investigates to what extent this convergence has been mirrored within the universities by systematically comparing staff changes over more than a decade in five countries: The United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Norway, and Denmark. Measures of staff changes are partial but tangible indicators, which are reasonably comparable across countries and over time. The empirical analysis isolates and examines two parallel staff trends, which the higher education literature currently highlights as crucial for ongoing university transformations: Proliferation of temporary academic staff and professionalisation of administrative/managerial staff. In doing so, the analysis provides a tangible empirical basis for assessing the impact of global trends on historically distinct university systems. Staff compositions have changed in the same direction, but from different starting points and with different intensity. Staff changes have been larger in Europe than in the US, but not in ways erasing major historical differences. The directional similarity rather suggests that dissimilar universities have added a similar layer of certain types of human resources.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116058225","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2019.1643254
Lisa Unangst
ABSTRACT The refugee influx in the European context has challenged national systems and individual higher education institutions to develop and iterate solutions for prospective and, increasingly, enrolled university students. In the German setting, enormous federal investment has supported a robust response, though one which in several aspects lacks cohesion. This paper discusses possible implications of refugee student enrolment in German universities, and offers recommendations for policy initiatives in the same context. Key proposals include: revisiting the numerus clausus admissions system; expanding the existing student services model; emphasizing an early focus on subject-specific language proficiency (Fachsprache); emergency funds for small student expenses; the development of internships for refugee students; and support for student and staff collaboration and information sharing at both the state and federal levels.
{"title":"Refugees in the German higher education system: implications and recommendations for policy change","authors":"Lisa Unangst","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2019.1643254","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2019.1643254","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The refugee influx in the European context has challenged national systems and individual higher education institutions to develop and iterate solutions for prospective and, increasingly, enrolled university students. In the German setting, enormous federal investment has supported a robust response, though one which in several aspects lacks cohesion. This paper discusses possible implications of refugee student enrolment in German universities, and offers recommendations for policy initiatives in the same context. Key proposals include: revisiting the numerus clausus admissions system; expanding the existing student services model; emphasizing an early focus on subject-specific language proficiency (Fachsprache); emergency funds for small student expenses; the development of internships for refugee students; and support for student and staff collaboration and information sharing at both the state and federal levels.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124933477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2019.1640634
M. Hinfelaar, P. Hildreth
ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to address how universities contribute through a helix model of partnership to regional development in a peripheral but functionally connected area which finds itself outside major conurbations. In doing so, it shows how local universities may collaborate with each other and with other institutional actors, including the private sector, to gather data on how their graduates contribute to the regional economy. A case study of the North Wales Mersey Dee area (the ‘NWMD’), a cross-border region within the UK, provides the evidence base. There are gaps in international studies into how universities contribute to the development of their cities and regions, because these studies typically assume that the university is part of an urban concentration with the impact of their development and engagement radiating out into the hinterland. This study explores a scenario with a more dispersed picture, requiring even more effort from key stakeholders, along with the universities, to effect positive change through a policy agenda of ‘place-based’ strategies. Recommendations are made for longitudinal studies in similarly peripheral and under-performing regions to gauge how universities can work within local partnerships, leveraging government-backed investment to drive improvements.
{"title":"The role of universities in peripheral regions: the case of the North Wales and Mersey Dee area","authors":"M. Hinfelaar, P. Hildreth","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2019.1640634","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2019.1640634","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to address how universities contribute through a helix model of partnership to regional development in a peripheral but functionally connected area which finds itself outside major conurbations. In doing so, it shows how local universities may collaborate with each other and with other institutional actors, including the private sector, to gather data on how their graduates contribute to the regional economy. A case study of the North Wales Mersey Dee area (the ‘NWMD’), a cross-border region within the UK, provides the evidence base. There are gaps in international studies into how universities contribute to the development of their cities and regions, because these studies typically assume that the university is part of an urban concentration with the impact of their development and engagement radiating out into the hinterland. This study explores a scenario with a more dispersed picture, requiring even more effort from key stakeholders, along with the universities, to effect positive change through a policy agenda of ‘place-based’ strategies. Recommendations are made for longitudinal studies in similarly peripheral and under-performing regions to gauge how universities can work within local partnerships, leveraging government-backed investment to drive improvements.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121809173","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2019.1640635
Xilu Dong, P. Maassen, B. Stensaker
ABSTRACT Balancing excellence and diversity effectively in the higher education sector is one of the most challenging tasks for national governments. While a number of countries around the world have initiated university excellence schemes, it is more difficult to identify policy initiatives that also take into account how institutional diversity is to be enhanced simultaneously. By an in-depth analysis of the voluntary, and later mandatory, first-level discipline evaluation scheme in China from 2003 to 2016, the article discusses possible long-term impacts of this scheme both regarding excellence and diversity in the higher education landscape in the country. In conclusion, it is argued that decentralized decision-making within a centralized evaluation scheme is an interesting governance approach for trying to balance excellence and diversity in higher education. However, institutional diversity is not necessarily positively correlated to disciplinary diversity.
{"title":"Balancing excellence and diversity in higher education? The role of the Chinese first-level discipline evaluation scheme","authors":"Xilu Dong, P. Maassen, B. Stensaker","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2019.1640635","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2019.1640635","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Balancing excellence and diversity effectively in the higher education sector is one of the most challenging tasks for national governments. While a number of countries around the world have initiated university excellence schemes, it is more difficult to identify policy initiatives that also take into account how institutional diversity is to be enhanced simultaneously. By an in-depth analysis of the voluntary, and later mandatory, first-level discipline evaluation scheme in China from 2003 to 2016, the article discusses possible long-term impacts of this scheme both regarding excellence and diversity in the higher education landscape in the country. In conclusion, it is argued that decentralized decision-making within a centralized evaluation scheme is an interesting governance approach for trying to balance excellence and diversity in higher education. However, institutional diversity is not necessarily positively correlated to disciplinary diversity.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121707157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2019.1637772
Tebeje Molla, D. Cuthbert
ABSTRACT The demands of Industry 4.0 (the Fourth Industrial Revolution) for a future-ready skilled workforce have placed significant political pressure on PhD programs to deliver different sorts of graduates. The paper documents the prevalent ‘skills gap’ narrative of global policy actors and, and using a multi-scalar policy lens, examines global and national research-training policy debates and Australian institutional responses to calls to transform the PhD to make it more amenable to the new economic conditions. We provide a survey and analysis of recent institutional changes to the PhD in Australia and find that these fall into three overlapping categories: increased employability skills training; the development of industry- and end-user engaged programs; and flexible pathways to the PhD. Following this analysis, we step back to ask some critical questions of these developments both in terms of how effectively they answer the challenges put out in Industry 4.0 discourses and the problematic assumptions, silences and omissions in the policy debates and university responses. Drawing on a capability approach to human development we argue that PhD graduates should not only be prepared to meet the demands of Industry 4.0 but also to lead us through the socio-economic transformations this revolution may entail.
{"title":"Calibrating the PhD for Industry 4.0: global concerns, national agendas and Australian institutional responses","authors":"Tebeje Molla, D. Cuthbert","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2019.1637772","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2019.1637772","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The demands of Industry 4.0 (the Fourth Industrial Revolution) for a future-ready skilled workforce have placed significant political pressure on PhD programs to deliver different sorts of graduates. The paper documents the prevalent ‘skills gap’ narrative of global policy actors and, and using a multi-scalar policy lens, examines global and national research-training policy debates and Australian institutional responses to calls to transform the PhD to make it more amenable to the new economic conditions. We provide a survey and analysis of recent institutional changes to the PhD in Australia and find that these fall into three overlapping categories: increased employability skills training; the development of industry- and end-user engaged programs; and flexible pathways to the PhD. Following this analysis, we step back to ask some critical questions of these developments both in terms of how effectively they answer the challenges put out in Industry 4.0 discourses and the problematic assumptions, silences and omissions in the policy debates and university responses. Drawing on a capability approach to human development we argue that PhD graduates should not only be prepared to meet the demands of Industry 4.0 but also to lead us through the socio-economic transformations this revolution may entail.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115907523","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-30DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2019.1610977
B. Seetanah, Viraiyan Teeroovengadum
ABSTRACT This study investigates the impact of higher education on economic growth and is based on a sample of 18 African economies over the time period 1980–2015. The research makes use of a Panel Vector Autoregression (PVAR) framework to account for potential dynamic and endogenous relationship in modelling of the tertiary education–growth nexus. The findings show that higher education significantly increases the economic growth of the sample of African countries understudy with a lagged time. The economic effect of higher education is observed to be relatively smaller as those reported for the case of developed countries and also in comparison with primary and secondary education. Interestingly, this research also confirms the presence of a reverse causation as the economy’s income is also a determinant of tertiary education, although with a lagged time. Domestic and foreign direct investment, education attainment as well as openness level are also observed to be other determinants of tertiary education enrolment. Finally, there is evidence that tertiary education encourages private and foreign direct investment thus indirectly affecting growth rates.
{"title":"Does higher education matter in African economic growth? Evidence from a PVAR approach","authors":"B. Seetanah, Viraiyan Teeroovengadum","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2019.1610977","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2019.1610977","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study investigates the impact of higher education on economic growth and is based on a sample of 18 African economies over the time period 1980–2015. The research makes use of a Panel Vector Autoregression (PVAR) framework to account for potential dynamic and endogenous relationship in modelling of the tertiary education–growth nexus. The findings show that higher education significantly increases the economic growth of the sample of African countries understudy with a lagged time. The economic effect of higher education is observed to be relatively smaller as those reported for the case of developed countries and also in comparison with primary and secondary education. Interestingly, this research also confirms the presence of a reverse causation as the economy’s income is also a determinant of tertiary education, although with a lagged time. Domestic and foreign direct investment, education attainment as well as openness level are also observed to be other determinants of tertiary education enrolment. Finally, there is evidence that tertiary education encourages private and foreign direct investment thus indirectly affecting growth rates.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127572072","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17460263.2019.1565635
H. Coates
It is easy to construct 2019 as one of great consequence for higher education policy. Pressing uncertainties abound, about perennial issues like funding and accreditation, about emerging political agendas, and about the always promising yet expensive computerisation of learning. But deeper, more existential, concerns are stalking. Higher education is at the edge of debates about innovation, population, workforce, societal engagement and the economy. ‘Public policy’ has become ‘secret strategy’, through commercialisation, digitisation and diplomacy. Governments are calling on universities to demonstrate the public value they create and contribute. Universities are in the crosshairs of emerging geopolitical posturing. Policy and research communities have been absorbed by new routines, corporations and methodologies. Policy itself seems challenged in several places in which bedrock terms like ‘system’ and ‘institution’ are themselves being questioned. Simplistically, there are three ways to cope with such uncertainty. One approach is to hunker in offices, hold teddy bears, and nourish cosy dystopian or hobbyist conversations among old chums. A braver accommodation is to venture into unfamiliar realms, to defend good practices and hard work, educate the masses, and maybe clutch for risky or novel perspectives. The more ambitious posture, which requires acumen and courage, is to venture into imaginative dialogues which solve real-world puzzles and along the way demonstrate the tenacity and brilliance that strengthens higher education itself. Policy Reviews in Higher Education (PRiHE) was launched in 2015 to become a thinkingperson’s ‘go-to place’ for insights into important aspects of higher education. In formal terms, the journal was launched with the aim of ‘opening up a space for publishing in-depth accounts of significant areas of policy development affecting higher education internationally’. Two volumes, 4 issues and 25 articles down the track, it is becoming clearer how this important platform can play an influential role. In this editorial, I offer eight tactics for crafting consequential policy research papers for submission to PRiHE. The point is not to present any kind of exhaustive recipe or checklist, but to clarify practical guideposts which may stimulate and shape papers that make a difference. The tactics share a simple and powerful idea that policy research is about making higher education better, not bibliometric gymnastics. Sure, publishing in PRiHE will create value for your career and institution. But what really matters is writing papers which convey helpful insights and perspectives, and provide valuable evidence for/against decision-making. Please use these ideas to guide your contribution. First, pick large policy problems which your research can help clarify or advance. There is no secret ingredient, but a few questions may help stir imagination and planning. What do ‘people who matter’ talk about in the media, at conferences
{"title":"Eight tactics for engineering consequential higher education policy research papers","authors":"H. Coates","doi":"10.1080/17460263.2019.1565635","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17460263.2019.1565635","url":null,"abstract":"It is easy to construct 2019 as one of great consequence for higher education policy. Pressing uncertainties abound, about perennial issues like funding and accreditation, about emerging political agendas, and about the always promising yet expensive computerisation of learning. But deeper, more existential, concerns are stalking. Higher education is at the edge of debates about innovation, population, workforce, societal engagement and the economy. ‘Public policy’ has become ‘secret strategy’, through commercialisation, digitisation and diplomacy. Governments are calling on universities to demonstrate the public value they create and contribute. Universities are in the crosshairs of emerging geopolitical posturing. Policy and research communities have been absorbed by new routines, corporations and methodologies. Policy itself seems challenged in several places in which bedrock terms like ‘system’ and ‘institution’ are themselves being questioned. Simplistically, there are three ways to cope with such uncertainty. One approach is to hunker in offices, hold teddy bears, and nourish cosy dystopian or hobbyist conversations among old chums. A braver accommodation is to venture into unfamiliar realms, to defend good practices and hard work, educate the masses, and maybe clutch for risky or novel perspectives. The more ambitious posture, which requires acumen and courage, is to venture into imaginative dialogues which solve real-world puzzles and along the way demonstrate the tenacity and brilliance that strengthens higher education itself. Policy Reviews in Higher Education (PRiHE) was launched in 2015 to become a thinkingperson’s ‘go-to place’ for insights into important aspects of higher education. In formal terms, the journal was launched with the aim of ‘opening up a space for publishing in-depth accounts of significant areas of policy development affecting higher education internationally’. Two volumes, 4 issues and 25 articles down the track, it is becoming clearer how this important platform can play an influential role. In this editorial, I offer eight tactics for crafting consequential policy research papers for submission to PRiHE. The point is not to present any kind of exhaustive recipe or checklist, but to clarify practical guideposts which may stimulate and shape papers that make a difference. The tactics share a simple and powerful idea that policy research is about making higher education better, not bibliometric gymnastics. Sure, publishing in PRiHE will create value for your career and institution. But what really matters is writing papers which convey helpful insights and perspectives, and provide valuable evidence for/against decision-making. Please use these ideas to guide your contribution. First, pick large policy problems which your research can help clarify or advance. There is no secret ingredient, but a few questions may help stir imagination and planning. What do ‘people who matter’ talk about in the media, at conferences","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129881793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2018.1564353
L. Morley, Daniel Leyton, Yumiko Hada
ABSTRACT Internationalisation is a polyvalent policy discourse, saturated in conceptual and ideological ambiguity. It is an assemblage of commodification, exploitation and opportunity and is a container for multiple aspirations, anxieties, and affordances. It combines modernisation, detraditionalisation, and expansiveness, with knowledge capitalism, linguistic imperialism, and market dominance. There are notable policy shadows and silences, especially relating to the emerging subjectivities, motivations and narratives of internationalised subjects, and experiences that expose the gendered, racialised, epistemic and affective inequalities constituting academic mobility. This paper explores the affective economy and policyscape of internationalisation drawing upon interview data gathered in one private and one national university in Japan with 13 migrant academics. What emerged from our study is that internationalisation policies, processes and practices generate multiple affective engagements. Internationalising oneself can be repressive and generative, with migrant academics finding themselves both vulnerable and animated by their diverse and frequently embodied experiences.
{"title":"The affective economy of internationalisation: migrant academics in and out of Japanese higher education","authors":"L. Morley, Daniel Leyton, Yumiko Hada","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2018.1564353","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2018.1564353","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Internationalisation is a polyvalent policy discourse, saturated in conceptual and ideological ambiguity. It is an assemblage of commodification, exploitation and opportunity and is a container for multiple aspirations, anxieties, and affordances. It combines modernisation, detraditionalisation, and expansiveness, with knowledge capitalism, linguistic imperialism, and market dominance. There are notable policy shadows and silences, especially relating to the emerging subjectivities, motivations and narratives of internationalised subjects, and experiences that expose the gendered, racialised, epistemic and affective inequalities constituting academic mobility. This paper explores the affective economy and policyscape of internationalisation drawing upon interview data gathered in one private and one national university in Japan with 13 migrant academics. What emerged from our study is that internationalisation policies, processes and practices generate multiple affective engagements. Internationalising oneself can be repressive and generative, with migrant academics finding themselves both vulnerable and animated by their diverse and frequently embodied experiences.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114574107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2018.1564354
Johan Söderlind, Lars Geschwind
ABSTRACT Based on data from interviews conducted with 14 academic managers at two Swedish universities, this article investigates the consequences of the increasing prevalence of performance measurement in the higher education sector. The study contributes to the discussion of how performance measurement impacts academic work, focusing specifically on its influence on how meaning is created and recreated by academic managers. By applying the sensemaking perspective, as proposed by Weick ([1995. Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications]), the article explores seven properties of the sensemaking process. The study results demonstrate the influence of metrics on the process by which managers give meaning to academic work. Performance measures are interpreted by academic managers as important in acquiring resources, supporting decision-making, and enhancing organisational legitimacy. They also reinforce social scripts of competition and success, although they are often understood as being unable to indicate scientific quality. The consequence for sensemaking in teaching and research activities is that measurable performance is understood to be increasingly important. However, a notable finding from the study is that the managers are aware of how metrics promote specific forms of academic work and often attempt to balance these incentives by acknowledging the values and priorities that these metrics are unable to assess. This finding highlights the important role of academic managers as they counteract some of the pressure caused by various performance measures.
{"title":"Making sense of academic work: the influence of performance measurement in Swedish universities","authors":"Johan Söderlind, Lars Geschwind","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2018.1564354","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2018.1564354","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Based on data from interviews conducted with 14 academic managers at two Swedish universities, this article investigates the consequences of the increasing prevalence of performance measurement in the higher education sector. The study contributes to the discussion of how performance measurement impacts academic work, focusing specifically on its influence on how meaning is created and recreated by academic managers. By applying the sensemaking perspective, as proposed by Weick ([1995. Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications]), the article explores seven properties of the sensemaking process. The study results demonstrate the influence of metrics on the process by which managers give meaning to academic work. Performance measures are interpreted by academic managers as important in acquiring resources, supporting decision-making, and enhancing organisational legitimacy. They also reinforce social scripts of competition and success, although they are often understood as being unable to indicate scientific quality. The consequence for sensemaking in teaching and research activities is that measurable performance is understood to be increasingly important. However, a notable finding from the study is that the managers are aware of how metrics promote specific forms of academic work and often attempt to balance these incentives by acknowledging the values and priorities that these metrics are unable to assess. This finding highlights the important role of academic managers as they counteract some of the pressure caused by various performance measures.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114737158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2018.1564886
Terri Kim, W. Ng
ABSTRACT This article critically interrogates East Asian academics’ positional identities in UK universities, internationalisation and diversification against the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) and Critical Race Theory (CRT) framework. Contemporary UK policy promoting racial equality and diversity is often over-generalised, while the critical race theory-based literature has focused on hegemonic notions of ‘white privilege’. Neither discourse provides an adequate, comparative perspective of power relations within diverse racial and ethnic groups. In advancing this perspective, the article compares the experiences of two groups of East Asian academics working in UK universities. One group is foreign-born but has strong British identities following their English élite education. The other group came to the UK for postgraduate studies and/or chose to work in Britain. The paper changes the picture of a static, black and white perspective in the BME policy and CRT literature by offering a dynamic, fluid discourse involving East Asian academics’ narratives of their positional identities and choices.
{"title":"Ticking the ‘other’ box: positional identities of East Asian academics in UK universities, internationalisation and diversification*","authors":"Terri Kim, W. Ng","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2018.1564886","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2018.1564886","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article critically interrogates East Asian academics’ positional identities in UK universities, internationalisation and diversification against the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) and Critical Race Theory (CRT) framework. Contemporary UK policy promoting racial equality and diversity is often over-generalised, while the critical race theory-based literature has focused on hegemonic notions of ‘white privilege’. Neither discourse provides an adequate, comparative perspective of power relations within diverse racial and ethnic groups. In advancing this perspective, the article compares the experiences of two groups of East Asian academics working in UK universities. One group is foreign-born but has strong British identities following their English élite education. The other group came to the UK for postgraduate studies and/or chose to work in Britain. The paper changes the picture of a static, black and white perspective in the BME policy and CRT literature by offering a dynamic, fluid discourse involving East Asian academics’ narratives of their positional identities and choices.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125818575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：