CONCLUSIONS August 29, 2007 12.30 – 13.00 Stephan Laske

1. CONCLUSIONS August 29, 2007 12.30 – 13.00 Stephan Laske

2. Researchers in Higher Education in Search of Identity

3. Two basic values: Everything should be questioned Objective of HE is serving society (this in itself is full of dilemmas) From di- to tetra- to multilemma equity effectiveness efficiency and sufficiency ... as interrelated values A „second university revolution“ is inevitable Economic factors are not the only ones but have strongly to be considered … Keynotes in brief (José Mora)

4. Economic factors are too strongly considered. Private sector philosophy, objectives, language and instruments are gaining strong power – autonomy is a fiction when budgets are related with KPI and other forms of indirect control of the government „CEOs“ in HE institutions today use a disciplined and disciplining language, they would not even have dreamt of some years before: Efficiency, TQM, planning, budgeting, re-engineering, performance management, intellectual capital report, benchmarking, input-output, core competences … Is „Bologna“ leading to a „utilitarian trap“ and the economisation of HE institutions to the commodification of academic work (Hugh Willmott)? Keynotes in brief (Lee Parker)

5. Keynotes in brief (Barbara Czarniawska) Alterity and identity interplay in construction (not only) of a business school University in Ruins? „All in all, the Western university has been a remarkably durable and adaptive institution … it is unlikely that evolving events will bring about the demise of universities as we know them“ (Shapiro) Even people who are brilliant teachers and brilliant researchers have a 24 hours long day … Utopia University! Service and sabotage! An answer?

6. Managing a camel? Corporatisation and commercialisation (Lee Parker) lead to a kind of HE-catherding – and the image of the catboys very often corresponds to the „tough guy-image“ of new university leaders: the lonely monocrat, loaden with responsibility, equipped with the traces of the daily battles, riding towards the sun … Whose behaviour seems more strange? What about the freedom of both cats and herders to behave in a different way …? How strong is the tension of the system? Is there a chance for escaping … Two critical questions: Isn‘t „rational strategic behaviour“ of universities a myth? Strategies are often emerging ex post (Karl Weick) Core competences: Isn‘t there a problem if universities/schools have similar profiles (e.g. „finance“ in business schools)? Keynotes in brief (Alison Wolf)

7. What can we learn about institutions failing to bring about change? The focus in many studies is quite often on (high reputation) research universities: what about the other 3.500 higher education institutions in Europe? There seems to be a focus on the role of the executive in governing change: What other actors (e.g. policy entrepreneurs) play a role in change processes and what happens internally in an organisation before a change process is formally embarked upon? What are the internal power dynamics – expressed through different cultures and different disciplines – of change? What role do images, identity and reputation play in institutional change processes? T 1: Between university and multiversity: Governing institutional change

8. Higher education institutions as professional bureaucracies are full of paradoxes and contradictions that make life exciting and challenging at the same time. The same is true for most higher education systems: Some of these paradoxes are rooted in the basics of the systems and institutions, some of them are constructed by national higher educational policy or contradictory political aims. Track 2 will focus on the tensions produced by these paradoxes and the management of contradictions as an essential qualification of politicians and managers in higher education. „Bologna“ still is the keyword attracting a lot of people for discussion. Very interesting: the presentation of the politics of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela installing a system of HE institutions next to the already existing HEIs. Very challenging: national differences of understanding T 2: Managing paradoxes: Grounding big ideas

9. Central questions: What is a quality culture? Can policy drive change? Can quality be objectively measured and does it have to be? Does external QA produce better quality? Central comment of the Track Chair: It‘s been so much fun!!! T 3: Breaking with rituals: Making sense of quality work

10. The emphasis on market-led reforms has transformed the role of students from that of passive receivers of knowledge to that of customers, partners and potential leaders. As a result, universities have adopted more customer-oriented policies and practices such as systematic institutional research and evaluation based on student feedback and student involvement in institutional governance. There were lots of interesting papers regarding e.g. qualitative studies on student perceptions or factors influencing the choice of a university, needs and expectations of students. Very interested and active audience. T 4 a: Student needs and satisfaction with higher education

11. Report of Track Chair: Very interesting presentations on study experiences, student funding and fees, on first year experiences and the relevance of faculty-students-interaction Partly very thoughtful research designs, relevant results for practitioners and HE policy makers Excellent organisation and technical support of track assistants I never heard a professor singing at the end of his keynote I appreciate that we thought of James Taylor T 4 b: Student experience of higher education

12. Track 5 will focus on critical evaluations of the ways in which meaning is constructed in and by systems of performance measurement and management. Papers reflect on the effects and side-effects of such practices – for example, the impact of number crunching on the academic life world, the relationship between qualitative and quantitative aspects in assessment and measurement, standardisation of teaching and research via numbers, or the changing nature of decision making in higher education institutions when performance measures are involved. Brief report: There were two sorts of papers: some are quite enthusiasted by „numerical support of decision making“; others look very critically to the unintended consequences of this „numerification“ T 5: Constructing meaning from performance measures

13. Main topics: Tuition discounting: aim: selecting a student body by design rather than by chance – developing a predictive model setting the optimal prize The entrepreneurial university: different national trends towards greater institutional autonomy and marketisation shape the movement towards entrepreneurialism in universities The institutionalisation of the European Higher Education Area and academic collaboration across boundaries: Different national drivers and reform goals for the Bologna process – open end of the process Many interesting papers of high quality T 6: Crossing boundaries: Collaborating and/or competing?

14. Main topics: Expectations and reality study in an Irish HE institution (part of an ongoing investigation) Hiring the best available academics: this presentation engendered controversy Track Chairs comment: Standard of papers varied quite a bit. Changing attendance. T 7: Matching staff, structures, and resources

15. Research on teaching and learning today often illustrates that quality in universities is firmly related to teaching and assessment methods which actively engage the students and build upon their curiosity, experience and background. Examples of such methods involve more collaboration and networking between students and teachers, between students, professors and organisations outside the university, more complex assessment methods, and a more extended use of problem-based and/or research-based teaching. Track 8 explores case studies and projects which include different applications of the shift from a teaching to a learning focus with the overall aim of enhancing the quality of student learning. T 8: Teaching and Learning

16. Universities‘ capability to survive the different threats during their long history might be due to the many di-, tri-, tetra- and more –lemmas and the related tensions. They activate the „inhabitants‘“ creativity. Final Hypothesis

17. It was a pleasure to have you here. Have a good and safe journey home. We look forward to seeing you all again in „wonderful, wonderful Copenhagen“ in 2008!