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.
-
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.”
-
ItemBoundaries of institutional autonomy and their impact on higher education(Elsevier, 2010)Institutional autonomy and the related concepts of academic or scientific freedom are defining characteristics of academe. ‘‘The university is the corporate realization of man’s basic determination to know’’ ( Jaspers, 1960: 20), and it is this classic notion of knowledge as sacrosanct upon which arguments for the autonomy of the university are ultimately grounded. Traditionally, it was assumed that the purpose or idea of the university was best served by its separation from government, on the one hand, and society, on the other. The state served as the guardian rather than the determiner of academic principles, with the issue being ‘‘how far higher education institutions are licensed to be free to set their own norms, or even to be in conflict or tension with the society that sponsors them to be its antibodies’’ (Kogan, 1984: 67). For most contemporary higher education institutions, however, the boundaries of institutional autonomy have become exceedingly porous.
-
ItemCountry paper on Australia: cross-border higher education in Australia(United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), 2005)The growth of cross-border higher education and increase in number of international students in Australia has been remarkable indeed. The reasons for this are complex, but rest mainly on the increasing market-like co-ordination of Australian higher education, funding diversification and the continuing privatisation of the public higher education sector. This paper outlines the development of cross-border higher education in Australia. Section I begins with a detailed discussion of the higher education policy background that is essential to an understanding of why Australia has become a world leader in international higher education. Next, in Section II the paper briefly examines some of the reasons for Australia’s success in international higher education. Then Section III examines the rise of cross-border higher education in this country with a policy shift from aid to trade with respect to international students. The discussion is loosely organized around the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) four modes of service delivery. Next Section IV gives a summary of Australia’s GATS commitments and a few of the quality assurance (QA) issues. The paper concludes with a look at where Australia may be heading with respect to cross-border higher education (see Section V).
-
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.