Pub Date : 2018-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2018.1424560
Mollie Dollinger, H. Coates, Emmaline Bexley, G. Croucher, Ryan S. Naylor
ABSTRACT Growing interest in university–industry collaboration (UIC) calls for a need to develop frameworks and compare overseas models to better understand how successful UIC occurs. This article provides a framework for analyzing UIC across three dimensions: environmental, technical, and managerial. It further breaks down these dimensions to suggest key attributes that can inform us about how dimensions can develop and improve. Subsequently, we use the framework outlined to analyze seven countries’ UIC policies and frameworks and present key findings. The findings of this research include the importance of building and training a workforce ready to engage across sectors and of creating clear intellectual property policies, and the need for dedicated programs and national policies that support UIC growth.
{"title":"Framing international approaches to university–industry collaboration","authors":"Mollie Dollinger, H. Coates, Emmaline Bexley, G. Croucher, Ryan S. Naylor","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2018.1424560","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2018.1424560","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Growing interest in university–industry collaboration (UIC) calls for a need to develop frameworks and compare overseas models to better understand how successful UIC occurs. This article provides a framework for analyzing UIC across three dimensions: environmental, technical, and managerial. It further breaks down these dimensions to suggest key attributes that can inform us about how dimensions can develop and improve. Subsequently, we use the framework outlined to analyze seven countries’ UIC policies and frameworks and present key findings. The findings of this research include the importance of building and training a workforce ready to engage across sectors and of creating clear intellectual property policies, and the need for dedicated programs and national policies that support UIC growth.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122001588","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 : 2017-04-18DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2017.1303788
H. Perraton
ABSTRACT This paper reviews the development of international student mobility in the twentieth century as exemplified by Britain, France, Russia or the Soviet Union, and the United States. It summarises data on international student numbers and describes the development of policy at an institutional and national level in these four countries. Conclusions are drawn and related to current policy debates.
{"title":"Foreign students in the twentieth century: a comparative study of patterns and policies in Britain, France, Russia and the United States","authors":"H. Perraton","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2017.1303788","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2017.1303788","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper reviews the development of international student mobility in the twentieth century as exemplified by Britain, France, Russia or the Soviet Union, and the United States. It summarises data on international student numbers and describes the development of policy at an institutional and national level in these four countries. Conclusions are drawn and related to current policy debates.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132345365","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 : 2017-04-09DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2017.1307093
T. Karran, K. Beiter, K. Appiagyei-Atua
ABSTRACT Using comparative data from 28 states within the European Union, this paper is a comprehensive assessment of the protection for, and (by extension) the health of, academic freedom in the universities of the nations of the European Union. The paper, extending previous work in this area, adopts a ‘bottom-up’ approach utilising 37 specific parameters that relate to international treaties, and national, constitutional, and legislative protection for academic freedom, along with legal regulations concerning institutional governance, the appointment of the rector, and the existence of academic tenure, in order to create a composite picture of the health of academic freedom in the universities within the European Union nations.
{"title":"Measuring academic freedom in Europe: a criterion referenced approach","authors":"T. Karran, K. Beiter, K. Appiagyei-Atua","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2017.1307093","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2017.1307093","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Using comparative data from 28 states within the European Union, this paper is a comprehensive assessment of the protection for, and (by extension) the health of, academic freedom in the universities of the nations of the European Union. The paper, extending previous work in this area, adopts a ‘bottom-up’ approach utilising 37 specific parameters that relate to international treaties, and national, constitutional, and legislative protection for academic freedom, along with legal regulations concerning institutional governance, the appointment of the rector, and the existence of academic tenure, in order to create a composite picture of the health of academic freedom in the universities within the European Union nations.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132905985","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 : 2017-04-06DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2017.1303787
Adriana Chiroleu, Mónica Marquina
ABSTRACT In recent decades, many Latin American governments have implemented policies to expand opportunities in higher education, aiming at reducing discrimination and social inequalities. These policies have taken different forms, according to the peculiarities of the respective higher education systems. The purpose of this paper is to explore the scope and limitations of these policies. We develop our analysis of theoretical literature on the subject, and review empirical information available from secondary sources of recent experience in five countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Venezuela. Argentina has increased opportunities for disadvantaged social sectors by expanding the public sector. Brazil has attempted to improve access for ethnic and social minorities in both public and private institutions. Chile is a unique case because of the continuing commitment to allow market forces to shape higher education. In Mexico, increased opportunities for access have resulted from the creation of intercultural universities and technical institutions in the public sector, as well as through growth in the private sector. Finally, in Venezuela, expansion occurred through the creation of a new system of universities that operates in parallel to traditional public institutions. We note that, in all cases, the policies reflect an underlying belief that there are only benefits to unlimited expansion, without regard to possible consequences, such as an excess of university graduates in economies with limited job opportunities for them. Moreover, these policies do not take into consideration the deficit of cultural and educational capital of young people who come from the most marginalised social sectors, deficits that may hinder their success. Concepts such as ‘overeducation’ or ‘credencialism’ call into question that optimistic belief and explain the limitations of the coverage expansion in terms of real democratisation.
{"title":"Democratisation or credentialism? Public policies of expansion of higher education in Latin America","authors":"Adriana Chiroleu, Mónica Marquina","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2017.1303787","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2017.1303787","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In recent decades, many Latin American governments have implemented policies to expand opportunities in higher education, aiming at reducing discrimination and social inequalities. These policies have taken different forms, according to the peculiarities of the respective higher education systems. The purpose of this paper is to explore the scope and limitations of these policies. We develop our analysis of theoretical literature on the subject, and review empirical information available from secondary sources of recent experience in five countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Venezuela. Argentina has increased opportunities for disadvantaged social sectors by expanding the public sector. Brazil has attempted to improve access for ethnic and social minorities in both public and private institutions. Chile is a unique case because of the continuing commitment to allow market forces to shape higher education. In Mexico, increased opportunities for access have resulted from the creation of intercultural universities and technical institutions in the public sector, as well as through growth in the private sector. Finally, in Venezuela, expansion occurred through the creation of a new system of universities that operates in parallel to traditional public institutions. We note that, in all cases, the policies reflect an underlying belief that there are only benefits to unlimited expansion, without regard to possible consequences, such as an excess of university graduates in economies with limited job opportunities for them. Moreover, these policies do not take into consideration the deficit of cultural and educational capital of young people who come from the most marginalised social sectors, deficits that may hinder their success. Concepts such as ‘overeducation’ or ‘credencialism’ call into question that optimistic belief and explain the limitations of the coverage expansion in terms of real democratisation.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121580975","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 : 2017-04-04DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2017.1305258
Michael Lanford
ABSTRACT Since its first announcement on 22 September 1992, the HOPE (Helping Outstanding Pupils Educationally) scholarship program’s influence on state policy and American higher education has been remarkable. Nevertheless, the Georgia HOPE scholarship is also worthy of critical interrogation. This paper examines the conception and implementation of the HOPE scholarship program by demonstrating how political agents made numerous changes to the scholarship to gain votes from their middle- and upper-class constituencies. Drawing upon primary sources (including oral histories and newspaper articles), I argue that these changes have crippled the HOPE scholarship’s effectiveness, damaged its ability to serve equity goals, and potentially endangered its future. This historical analysis is conducted through three theoretical prisms. The first draws upon the work of List and Sturm, who argue that ‘secondary policy issues’ that affect a limited number of people (e.g. a scholarship program) are still subject to the ‘disciplining effect’ of elections. The second concerns policy-focused political science, of which Hacker and Pierson's theory of ‘politics as organized combat’ plays a primary role. The third draws from Alon, S. (2009. “The Evolution of Class Inequality in Higher Education: Competition, Exclusion, and Adaptation.” American Sociological Review 74 (3): 731–55) theory of inequality in higher education, in which scholarship allocations are dependent upon a ‘shifting meritocracy’ that favors privileged socioeconomic groups.
{"title":"The political history of the Georgia HOPE scholarship program: a critical analysis","authors":"Michael Lanford","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2017.1305258","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2017.1305258","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Since its first announcement on 22 September 1992, the HOPE (Helping Outstanding Pupils Educationally) scholarship program’s influence on state policy and American higher education has been remarkable. Nevertheless, the Georgia HOPE scholarship is also worthy of critical interrogation. This paper examines the conception and implementation of the HOPE scholarship program by demonstrating how political agents made numerous changes to the scholarship to gain votes from their middle- and upper-class constituencies. Drawing upon primary sources (including oral histories and newspaper articles), I argue that these changes have crippled the HOPE scholarship’s effectiveness, damaged its ability to serve equity goals, and potentially endangered its future. This historical analysis is conducted through three theoretical prisms. The first draws upon the work of List and Sturm, who argue that ‘secondary policy issues’ that affect a limited number of people (e.g. a scholarship program) are still subject to the ‘disciplining effect’ of elections. The second concerns policy-focused political science, of which Hacker and Pierson's theory of ‘politics as organized combat’ plays a primary role. The third draws from Alon, S. (2009. “The Evolution of Class Inequality in Higher Education: Competition, Exclusion, and Adaptation.” American Sociological Review 74 (3): 731–55) theory of inequality in higher education, in which scholarship allocations are dependent upon a ‘shifting meritocracy’ that favors privileged socioeconomic groups.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117130962","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 : 2017-03-17DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2016.1246065
Daniel W. Lang
ABSTRACT For nearly 35 year’s Burton Clark’s triangle has been used as a paradigm for describing, assessing, and comparing systems of post-secondary education. Since then two major developments, neither of which could Clark have foreseen, in the financial management of higher education have occurred contemporaneously: incentive or performance funding on the part of the state and incentive-based budgeting on the part of universities. Both developments are based on fiscal incentives. Despite several inherent and inter-connected similarities, incentive funding and incentive-based budgeting have been appraised on parallel tracks, neither of which has led to a possible effect on Clark’s fundamental model, particularly with regard to the interaction of institutional behavior as it is shaped by and shapes systems of higher education. This study investigates their convergence with one another and the consequential effect on the relationship between the state, the university, and the market as foreseen by Clark’s Triangle. The study concludes that, although incentive funding and incentive-based budgeting are sometimes at cross-purposes, they are functionally so inter-connected, whether intentionally or coincidentally, and that they may change the shape of a given system’s 'triangle' by altering the zero-sum balance between the state, market and academic legs of the triangle.
{"title":"Fiscal incentives, Clark’s triangle, and the shape and shaping of higher education systems","authors":"Daniel W. Lang","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2016.1246065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2016.1246065","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT For nearly 35 year’s Burton Clark’s triangle has been used as a paradigm for describing, assessing, and comparing systems of post-secondary education. Since then two major developments, neither of which could Clark have foreseen, in the financial management of higher education have occurred contemporaneously: incentive or performance funding on the part of the state and incentive-based budgeting on the part of universities. Both developments are based on fiscal incentives. Despite several inherent and inter-connected similarities, incentive funding and incentive-based budgeting have been appraised on parallel tracks, neither of which has led to a possible effect on Clark’s fundamental model, particularly with regard to the interaction of institutional behavior as it is shaped by and shapes systems of higher education. This study investigates their convergence with one another and the consequential effect on the relationship between the state, the university, and the market as foreseen by Clark’s Triangle. The study concludes that, although incentive funding and incentive-based budgeting are sometimes at cross-purposes, they are functionally so inter-connected, whether intentionally or coincidentally, and that they may change the shape of a given system’s 'triangle' by altering the zero-sum balance between the state, market and academic legs of the triangle.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133145104","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 : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2016.1243016
L. Brunner
ABSTRACT In an effort to more efficiently utilize immigration to mitigate the negative economic impacts of falling population rates, some governments are shifting from human-capital to demand-driven immigrant selection approaches. While employers are typically seen as the resulting non-governmental selection actors, recent niche but growing immigration programs are repositioning higher educational institutions as additional yet inadvertent selection actors, typically unaware of their role. To illustrate the complexities inherent in this policy evolution, I historically trace the past 15 years of immigration selection design targeting international students in the Canadian province of British Columbia and highlight potential implications in light of increasing internationalization. I argue that educational policy researchers need to further understand and engage with the development of increasingly intertwined yet previously neglected policy areas – in this instance, immigration – as higher education assumes new roles in public life.
{"title":"Higher educational institutions as emerging immigrant selection actors: a history of British Columbia’s retention of international graduates, 2001–2016","authors":"L. Brunner","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2016.1243016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2016.1243016","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In an effort to more efficiently utilize immigration to mitigate the negative economic impacts of falling population rates, some governments are shifting from human-capital to demand-driven immigrant selection approaches. While employers are typically seen as the resulting non-governmental selection actors, recent niche but growing immigration programs are repositioning higher educational institutions as additional yet inadvertent selection actors, typically unaware of their role. To illustrate the complexities inherent in this policy evolution, I historically trace the past 15 years of immigration selection design targeting international students in the Canadian province of British Columbia and highlight potential implications in light of increasing internationalization. I argue that educational policy researchers need to further understand and engage with the development of increasingly intertwined yet previously neglected policy areas – in this instance, immigration – as higher education assumes new roles in public life.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123468469","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 : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2016.1245113
V. Ballerini
ABSTRACT The literature on education and globalization states that patterns of higher education systems tend toward international convergence, and that trends such as massification, privatization and internationalization are observable in nations with different degrees of development around the world. Neo-institutionalism and world systems theory differ on whether focus should be given to international convergence or domestic adaptation. Studies addressing historical and contextual dimensions of policy diffusion are relevant as they will further specify the nature of the extranational effects on national policies. The case of Argentina’s national higher education policy is particularly relevant to this literature due to political and academic traditions that have inhibited the diffusion of many global trends into the country. This study offers a comparative historical analysis of the issues that have been prioritized in Argentina’s higher education policy over three decades (1983–2015), the strategies employed by higher education actors, and the socioeconomic and political factors that led to unique manifestations there of global trends, such as massification, privatization, and internationalization. The paper shows how Argentina’s system became massified without privatization, why privatization failed to reach the levels of other Latin American countries, and how an internationalization strategy via regionalization was a means to lockdown domestic reforms.
{"title":"Global higher education trends and national policies: access, privatization, and internationalization in Argentina","authors":"V. Ballerini","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2016.1245113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2016.1245113","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The literature on education and globalization states that patterns of higher education systems tend toward international convergence, and that trends such as massification, privatization and internationalization are observable in nations with different degrees of development around the world. Neo-institutionalism and world systems theory differ on whether focus should be given to international convergence or domestic adaptation. Studies addressing historical and contextual dimensions of policy diffusion are relevant as they will further specify the nature of the extranational effects on national policies. The case of Argentina’s national higher education policy is particularly relevant to this literature due to political and academic traditions that have inhibited the diffusion of many global trends into the country. This study offers a comparative historical analysis of the issues that have been prioritized in Argentina’s higher education policy over three decades (1983–2015), the strategies employed by higher education actors, and the socioeconomic and political factors that led to unique manifestations there of global trends, such as massification, privatization, and internationalization. The paper shows how Argentina’s system became massified without privatization, why privatization failed to reach the levels of other Latin American countries, and how an internationalization strategy via regionalization was a means to lockdown domestic reforms.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114147089","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 : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2016.1244773
C. Manathunga
ABSTRACT Universities in the early twenty-first century have become captive sites of global capitalism. The role of universities in this neoliberal knowledge system is to produce consumable knowledge for transnational corporations and flexible, knowledge worker-entrepreneurs. It is difficult to see where the university’s roles in social justice and equity fit into the current higher education policy environment. While these are global trends in higher education, the focus of this article is on analysing key Australian policy documents from the 1950s to the 2000s. These policy texts contain discursive constructions of universities that both mirrored and produced powerful social imaginaries about higher education. Building upon earlier research, I analyse these policy documents using a form of Foucauldian archaeological analysis that seeks to trace the ways in which discourses define and delimit possible constructions of universities. This article makes an original contribution to contemporary debates about higher education policy because it engages in detailed Foucauldian archaeological analysis that opens up the present to critique, enabling us to trace how constructions of the postmodern university have emerged over time and have come to be normalised. It also offers counter-narratives about how policy futures might be [re]constructed.
{"title":"Excavating the role and purpose of university education in the postmodern age: historical insights from the South","authors":"C. Manathunga","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2016.1244773","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2016.1244773","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Universities in the early twenty-first century have become captive sites of global capitalism. The role of universities in this neoliberal knowledge system is to produce consumable knowledge for transnational corporations and flexible, knowledge worker-entrepreneurs. It is difficult to see where the university’s roles in social justice and equity fit into the current higher education policy environment. While these are global trends in higher education, the focus of this article is on analysing key Australian policy documents from the 1950s to the 2000s. These policy texts contain discursive constructions of universities that both mirrored and produced powerful social imaginaries about higher education. Building upon earlier research, I analyse these policy documents using a form of Foucauldian archaeological analysis that seeks to trace the ways in which discourses define and delimit possible constructions of universities. This article makes an original contribution to contemporary debates about higher education policy because it engages in detailed Foucauldian archaeological analysis that opens up the present to critique, enabling us to trace how constructions of the postmodern university have emerged over time and have come to be normalised. It also offers counter-narratives about how policy futures might be [re]constructed.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123737666","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 : 2017-01-02DOI: 10.1080/23322969.2016.1236351
M. Lim, Jakob Williams Øerberg
ABSTRACT This article questions the existing understanding of how global university rankings work to coordinate higher education policy. Rankings are often analyzed as accelerators of reform processes while their differences are overlooked. We suggest studying the particular encounters between rankers and national policy contexts as occasions for friction between policies, people, and practices across both national policy arenas and the ranking agencies. We draw on two multi-year field studies of India and Denmark to show how alignment between rankings and national reform agendas cannot be easily assumed. We present rankers in motion, policies in motion, and finally the complex nature of the ranking device that needs to be both a relevant and malleable policy instrument but also a fixed and legitimate standard. Policy-makers needed a reference point and the dynamic nature of rankings changed the policy processes themselves. We extend existing arguments about the role of rankings in policy-making by showing concretely how rankings are employed in and shape countries’ quests for positioning in the global knowledge economy. Rankings demand new explorations of their production and open up a space for new understandings of the links between policy assemblages and wider processes of transformation.
{"title":"Active instruments: on the use of university rankings in developing national systems of higher education","authors":"M. Lim, Jakob Williams Øerberg","doi":"10.1080/23322969.2016.1236351","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2016.1236351","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article questions the existing understanding of how global university rankings work to coordinate higher education policy. Rankings are often analyzed as accelerators of reform processes while their differences are overlooked. We suggest studying the particular encounters between rankers and national policy contexts as occasions for friction between policies, people, and practices across both national policy arenas and the ranking agencies. We draw on two multi-year field studies of India and Denmark to show how alignment between rankings and national reform agendas cannot be easily assumed. We present rankers in motion, policies in motion, and finally the complex nature of the ranking device that needs to be both a relevant and malleable policy instrument but also a fixed and legitimate standard. Policy-makers needed a reference point and the dynamic nature of rankings changed the policy processes themselves. We extend existing arguments about the role of rankings in policy-making by showing concretely how rankings are employed in and shape countries’ quests for positioning in the global knowledge economy. Rankings demand new explorations of their production and open up a space for new understandings of the links between policy assemblages and wider processes of transformation.","PeriodicalId":212965,"journal":{"name":"Policy Reviews in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120911328","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：