Faculty of Education - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemThe devil’s in the detail; Guy Neave and comparative higher education(Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS), University of Twente, 2007)Professor Guy Neave held the Chair of Comparative Higher Education Policy Studies at the University of Twente and his most substantial contributions to the study of higher education arise from his comparative perspective. However, his approach to the comparative study of higher education is not one that unduly bothers with the niceties of methodological rigour. Rather, he is primarily concerned with the realities and importance of time and place. Context - historical, geo-political and cultural - makes all the difference.
-
ItemInternational dimensions of the Australian academic profession(Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University, 2009)This paper provides insight into the international dimensions of the Australian academic profession. Australia has one of the most internationalised higher education student populations in the world, which leads us naturally to inquire into the international characteristics of its academic staff. It is important to consider, for instance, whether the academic workforce has internationalised in the same way as the student body, and how academic staff are responding educationally to various opportunities and challenges arising from internationalisation.
-
ItemIntroduction(UNESCO, 2008)“In December 2007, the Asia-Pacific Programme of Educational Innovation for Development (APEID), UNESCO Bangkok, convened the 11th UNESCO-APEID Conference entitled “Reinventing Higher Education: Toward Participatory and Sustainable Development.” This volume contains selected papers from that conference, which was held in Bangkok from 12 to 14 December 2007.”
-
ItemInnovation in higher education: the university paradox(Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF), 2006)Innovation is one of the major buzzwords in economic as well as higher education policy debates world-wide. In Europe, the Lisbon Agenda is the embodiment of this, with the clearly stated – though very difficult to attain – objective of Europe being the most dynamic and innovative economic block by 2010. In Australia the notion of transforming the economy from a primary industry-base to a knowledge-based economy is paramount in the governments policy, resulting in catchphrases such as the Clever Country. And in Asia, economies are rapidly transforming with the Chinese economy being one, though certainly not the only, example of major change and expansion. Within this framework, much emphasis is placed on the role of higher education and in particular of universities in supporting and sometimes even leading the quest for innovation. In this chapter we address this drive for innovation and the question of innovative universities by not only tackling the question why the theme of innovation has come so much to the fore and what places universities in so central a role in this. We also focus on the question what prevents universities to fully exploit their potential in stimulating innovation in our societies and economies. We do this by focussing first on the changing environmental conditions that universities face, including a particular stakeholder approach. Secondly, we explore the nature of the beast of little more through an analysis of the basic characteristics of universities. On the basis of this in the final part of this chapter we formulate some suggestions for effective reactions by universities for optimising their position in what we today so easily term the knowledge society.
-
ItemA tale of three cities: highlights and problems of Centralia, Octavia and Vitis Vinifera(Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS), 2005)In this brief chapter, some of the most salient characteristics of each of the three scenarios are highlighted using four main themes: system diversity, governance, funding and quality. These were not necessarily the dimensions across which the scenarios were first designed. On the contrary, we aimed at a critical reflection on what came out of the scenario design exercise from independent points of view. We especially draw attention, therefore, to some inherent tensions and contradictions in each of the scenarios, as a counterbalance to the positive tone of the previous chapters in which the scenarios were presented. Let us remind the reader that the Centralia scenario largely evolved (though systematised and ‘enlarged’) from the majority opinions of our respondents to the Delphi study, whilst the two other scenarios contrasted with this by making use of patterns of opinions (in a few cases majorities) in the Delphi-study response. There was quite a bit of ‘science fiction’ in those chapters and some intentional polishing to make each scenario appear attractive in as many respects as possible. Therefore before turning to external comments, we wish to qualify that rosy picture.