Higher Education and the Global Knowledge Race

1. Higher Education and the Global Knowledge Race Implications for World Societies Dr Rajani Naidoo University of Bath, UK R.Naidoo@bath.ac.uk

2. Tertiary gross enrollment ratio, percentages by geographical region, 2000 and 2007

3. ◆ La mobilité mondiale par continent d'origine de 1999 à 2006 Worldwide mobility by continent of origin from 1999 to 2006 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Proche et Moyen-Orient Europe Asie Amériques Afrique 03 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Afrique 161 877 175 997 173 196 215 468 282 274 284 450 285 256 284 260 Amériques 167 694 182 768 190 777 220 165 233 008 242 234 237 821 241 102 Asie 564 043 611 764 622 224 794 822 914 896 975 220 1 080 113 1 079 349 Europe 565 811 619 722 641 834 672 898 711 047 613 277 710 077 683 462 Proche et Moyen-Orient 80 925 93 872 90 051 92 956 107 478 111 521 117 700 113 982 Nombre total des étudiants internationaux 1 540 350 1 684 123 1 718 082 1 996 309 2 248 703 2 226 702 2 430 967 2 402 155

4. UK Public Sector Governance The Competitive State • Policies shaped to maximise returns from competition in international markets while abandoning some of the core functions of the welfare state. • State establishes conditions for the quasi market but also actively mobilises market mechanisms to attain political goals. • Steers systems by devolving some choice down to institutions while at the same time deploying mechanisms which restrict and channel choice, and supply feedback to the centre.

5. Increasing Govt Control with Limited Quasi Market Reform • Public subsidies for non-EU students removed. Universities set own fees. • Variable fees (1200 GBP to 3000 GBP). But must include plans for bursaries. • State capping and non-capping of student numbers and clawback systems. • Ad-hoc funding levers to ‘correct’ quasi market forces e.g to maintain ‘vulnerable’ Science subjects perceived to be in national interest. • Ear-marked grants - incentives for universities to implement government policy priorities.

6. Increase in Performance Monitoring • Through-put rates, staff-student ratios, widening participation, programme specifications, entry qualifications, completion rates, library facilities, student feedback, comparative tables of performance indicators . • Increase in Rules and Procedures • QAA- detailed codes prescribing the micro processes of programme development, admissions, assessment, feedback, supervision, disability. All levels (Undergraduate and Doctoral)

7. From Students to Consumers • open universities to competition leading to a rise in quality and relevance. • Consumerist Mechanisms : • Universities required to publish detailed information about academic programmes. Choice and students assured of what they receive at outset • National Student Survey. Public evaluation of university. • National Qualification Framework, modularisation and credits. Facilitate movement and choice • Institutionalisation of Complaints and Redress mechanisms at university and national level

8. Conceptualising the Case Studies • Bourdieu :Universities exist in an organisational field. Competition for resources invested with value in the field: ‘academic capital’. Universities placed in positions of hierarchy depending on the amount of academic capital possessed. • Hypothesis: high status universities will have institutional disposition and capital to resist forces that challenge existing practices. Universities at lower levels will be more open in disposition as well as more vulnerable to external forces. • Bernstein: Subjects conceptualised by classification and framing • Hypothesis: Strongly Classified and Framed subjects will be more resistant to bureaucratic and market forces

9. 2 Universities • High status, old, research intensive • Low status, new, teaching intensive • 2 subjects • Business Studies and Biology • Interviews (10 Years in institution) (1.5 hrs) • PVC (2) • Deans (4) • Heads of Department (4) • Directors of Programmes (4) • Lecturers (17) • Student focus groups (4) • Documentary Analysis • policy and strategy documents, minutes of meetings, rules and regulations, new structures, new posts

10. Impact on Structures and Processes • Monitoring structures and processes for QAA compliance pushed downwards into the university. • Increase in layers of bureaucracy at all levels to monitor compliance of educational programmes to QAA codes. (Old University) New posts (7), new structures (2), new committees (5) • Programme Directors (Old University): 60% increase in reporting processes.

11. Managers • Old University : ‘regulatory ritualisation’. Simulation of control. No follow up to audit and student evaluations. • New university: bureaucratic processes self perpetuating. Micro Management of staff. • Both universities : Managers measure impact (quality) looking at adherence to processes. • New Course outlines have programme specifications in correct format. Student evaluation forms for all courses. Required number of peer reviews of teaching conducted. .

12. Lecturer’s Responses • Both Universities: Resistance, Accommodation, Acceptance • Symbolic Compliance • Documentation for approval of new programmes simply copied from successful ones that had previously been passed including assessment strategies and personal and transferable skills. • Attended education quality meetings but sat there reading research papers. • Curriculum modularised to give the impression of choice but progression rules resulted in little flexibility or choice. • Business Studies (Both Universities) • Responded to consumerism

13. Lecturers Perceptions of Impact • (Both Universities)Enhanced Transparency and Standing • Course documentation gives students more control. • Gives status to education relative to research. • (Old University) Perverse Incentives • Rankings so crucial that pressure to distort performance data. Pressures from senior management to increase the proportion of first class passes awarded. • (Both Universities) Shift from first order to second order functions. • Time and effort shifts from developing innovative teaching strategies to record keeping. Resentment of ‘Visualisation’ of work .

14. Lecturers on Consumerism and Trust • Formalisation becomes a solution to the lack of trust. Defensive documentation and contractual form of relations. • Security- seeking tactics. • (New University) Shift from individually tailored feedback to standardised feedback that provides students with the same quantity of feedback despite differential needs so that students do not have recourse to complaints • (Old University) Innovative teaching requires taking risks which in turn requires trust. More opting for safe teaching where simple re-specified content can be transmitted and assessed in conventional form.

15. Student Focus Groups • Old University • Biology – traditional apprentice model • Business Studies : consumerist orientation. Education a ‘product’ to be passively consumed. Expect package of lecture notes, reading material and model assignments. Entitled to good grades. Predisposed to use complaints mechanisms • New University • little trust in official documentation or structures. No participation in student evaluations or staff student meetings. Information and strategies from trusted peers.

16. Learning from the Exploratory Study • Institutions and Subjects (to some extent) have different responses • Shifts in processes and practices in both universities and both subjects • Different actor groups experience ‘quality’ mechanisms and measure quality differently. Primary roles, changing power and control. • Importance of finding measures for impact. Usually proxy measures. Difficult to measure.

17. Publications and Next Steps • An article in JEP, book chapters, BJSE • UK Research Council Proposal • Building networks with other international partners • Comparative Study: cross disciplinary, cross institutional, cross nationally