‘MOOC’ stands for Massive Open Online Course, which is a form of distance learning embraced not only by traditional providers of distance learning (e.g. open universities) but also the elites that are highly visible in global rankings. The MOOCment originated from North Americas about five years ago and has rapidly spread around the world, with China, India and recently Europe, all pledging to MOOC along. They do this either by using established big-name American MOOC platforms (e.g. Coursera, edX) or constructing their own (e.g. iversity and FutureLearn in Europe; icourse in China).
MOOC enthusiasts see the movement as a revolutionary change in the world of learning. MOOC sceptics regard it as another technological hype that may soon fade away. The openness of MOOCs is also being called into question when the providers start to attach a price tag to the use of the platform, the licensed content or the certification of the learning results. Besides, some MOOCs are no longer ‘courses’, but complete degree programmes. Some MOOCs were intended for massive enrolments but have attracted only a few. With rapid developments in the MOOC world, the MOOC today may be completely different from the MOOC tomorrow and the MOOC in one country may be defined differently from one in another country, depending on the orientation of the providers and the target audiences.
Knowing that MOOCs have also caught the attention of European university leaders, national policymakers and those in EU institutions, the upcoming ACA European Policy Seminar – Making Sense of the MOOCs – seeks to unpack the concept of MOOCs, trace its developments in Europe and beyond, and to reveal the back office in the production of a MOOC with practical examples. We will also look at the geography of MOOCs and discuss whether and how MOOCs can possibly take root and blossom in Europe.
Producing MOOCs could be labour and capital intensive, although the contents are free for the learners and will probably remain so in order to continue attracting the attention of the mass. It is therefore necessary for institutional leaders to survey the changing MOOC environment, know what they are, how they could be organised and, more importantly, funded, before jumping onto the bandwagon.
As a usual practice in any ACA European Policy Seminar, we will bring together the most qualified speakers from a good mix of backgrounds to present a multidimensional picture of the subject. And we encourage open discussion, critical reflection, practical advice and friendly exchanges on this hotly debated topic.
The seminar, jointly organised with the European University Association (EUA), will be held on 10.10.2013 (Thu) in Brussels.
For this special event co-organised by ACA and EUA, we are pleased to extend the ACA members’ rate to all EUA members. More information about the fee rebate is available on the registration page.
38th in the series “European Policy Seminars” of the Academic Cooperation Association

1st World Congress on Access to Post-Secondary Education - 7th - 10th October 2013, Montreal, Canada   
Online registration now open - click here to go to the registration site!  (Simultaneous translation in French and Spanish available for plenary sessions).
Introducing the World Congress Series on Access to Post-secondary Education    
"Connecting the Unconnected"
We aim to make a tangible impact on rates of participation and success in post-secondary pathways wherever youth and adults are held back by poverty, birth and other economic and social circumstances.
The number of people participating in post-secondary education has risen globally over recent decades, but participating successfully still remains beyond the reach of many. New efforts are needed to tackle the factors that continue to hinder successful participation. The World Congress Series aims to spark a new global movement to advance opportunities in post-secondary education for all people, wherever they live or whatever their background. Our goal is to 'connect the unconnected' for collective impact. This also means addressing inadequate primary and secondary education and opportunities for adult learning.    
The first of three World Congresses will take place in Montreal, Canada in October 2013 (with two more occurring in 2015 and 2017 in different countries). The Congress will give a strong voice for students and young people and will be informed and shaped by a series of virtual and live International Student Forums (ISF) in different regions of the world. It will end with an Agenda for Action and a series of experimental projects that will be the fulcrum for work by the movement across all continents. With other global, national and local activities in between the three major events, the World Congress series will progressively build and enact an agenda for change.    
The Congress is an initiatve of the European Access Network. More information can be found on the World Congress website: www.eanworldcongress.org.

23rd Annual Conference, University of Edinburgh, Scotland  2-5 June 2014
The EAN annual conference represents a unique international experience of diversity in action. Hosted each year by a different member institution or organisation in Europe, the conference brings together policy-makers, academics, practitioners, researchers, and administrators from around the world to address key issues in access and widening participation, diversity and inclusion. It also engages the participation of students, student support services, student organisations and employers.
Our annual conference provides a platform and opportunity for those committed to equity, diversity and inclusion to discuss and debate topical issues, learn from one another, develop initiatives and make new European and international contacts. In particular it aims:

• To stimulate European and international collaboration to widen access and participation
• To share experiences and promote good practice in creating an inclusive higher education
• To disseminate research findings to a wider audience
• To contribute to the development of equitable tertiary education systems in Europe and beyond

The Access Evolution: Adapt to Survive?
June 2013, 22nd Annual Conference at the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France
Access to Higher Education: Is It a Right, a Privilege, or a Necessity
June 2012, 21st Annual Conference at University of Zagreb, Croatia
Student Diversity in Higher Education: Conflicting Realities
June 2011, 20th Anniversary Conference at VU University in Amsterdam, The Netherlands
From Access to Success: Closing the Knowledge Divide
June 2010, 19th Annual Conference at Södertörn University in Stockholm, Sweden
Past Conferences.

Access, Equity, Diversity, Inclusion - The four pillars of the EAN
The European Access Network encourages wider access to higher education for those who are currently under-represented, whether for reasons of gender, ethnic origin, nationality, age, disability, family background, vocational training, geographic location, or earlier educational disadvantage. The EAN is the only European-wide, non-governmental organisation for widening participation in higher education. It is organised for educational purposes and operates under English Law. Membership is open to all those with an interest in widening access. The EAN's objectives are:

    * to promote effective policies and negotiate resources for wider participation in higher education
    * to undertake collaborative research and development programmes on access issues
    * to share information on, and provide mutual support for, access developments
    * to co-operate with other international and national bodies to promote wider participation
    * to analyse access philosophy within and between member states
    * to share pedagogical strategies and multi-cultural curriculum approaches
    * to explore professional and political issues which promote wider participation
    * to encourage international exchanges among access students and staff

Download the EAN Constitution (PDF document).

The latest edition of the IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2) is now available online.
The In Focus section of the magazine includes 14 papers focusing on Innovative Approaches to Doctoral Education in Africa.By Chrissie Boughey and Sioux McKenna, Rhodes University, South Africa (C.Boughey@ru.ac.za). Participation rates and dropout rates for doctoral education are of concern globally but they are particularly dismal on the continent of Africa where the need for economic development and knowledge production is acute. These demands require that we scrutinise the challenges facing doctoral education and reconsider some of our established practices.
In South Africa, two recent publications have put the issue of doctoral education squarely on the higher education agenda. The CHE/CREST report on postgraduate study (2009) and the ASSAf report entitled The PhD Study (2010) both highlighted concerns about the way in which doctoral education is approached in the country.
In particular, these reports suggested the need for serious reflection on the ways in which doctoral education is undertaken in the broad areas of humanities and social sciences (HSS). One of the findings was that the traditional apprenticeship model, favoured in HSS, might not be the most efficient way to approach supervision. The traditional model relies on the relationship between the doctoral candidate and her supervisor as the main, or only, structure within which the research work is undertaken.
Such reliance assumes a level of experience and broad range of expertise in the supervisor that many novice supervisors may not have. It also assumes that the supervisor has access to a supportive disciplinary network with whom she/he can share her/his concerns and that the PhD student has a similar environment in which she/he can test out her/his ideas and develop her/his doctoral voice. The CHE/CREST report and the ASSAf report, along with a number of other similar reports, suggest that such assumptions are misplaced.
Furthermore, where the entire PhD journey is a private one between student and supervisor or supervisors, there is little opportunity for the student to be exposed to disciplinary concerns or to research approaches beyond those of her own study. The assumption that students will be exposed to such matters through the wider intellectual environment of the university or by attending conferences relies on the concept of full-time students with access to funding.
One newly established doctoral programme in Higher Education Studies at Rhodes University has been developed with these concerns in mind. While the PhD is, by its very nature, a single-authored piece of work whereby the individual student is examined by her/his peers, there are multiple benefits to undertaking such work within a community with shared interests. A community allows for deeper knowledge through shared endeavours. It provides a space for scholars to participate legitimately in conversations with others who are similarly engaged as well as with those who are already members of the disciplinary community and are now experienced researchers and supervisors.
The Doctoral Programme in Higher Education Studies was launched in January 2010. In 2013, the programme comprises 29 PhD scholars and 8 ‘Pre-Docs’ – candidates judged not to be ready for full registration at doctoral level and who are given the opportunity of engaging with structured reading and writing within the Programme overall. All candidates are, with just one exception, full-time academics at universities and are undertaking their doctoral studies on a part-time basis. Ten of the 23 public South African universities are represented in the student body as well as one academic from the private sector. There are also scholars from Malawi, Rwanda, Zimbabwe and the United Arab Emirates. Co-supervisors on the programme come from seven South African universities beyond Rhodes University where the programme is housed. This diversity enhances the potential for engagement and for research that moves beyond the narrow confines of each scholar’s own context of practice.
The development of the programme is in part a response to the national need for more doctoral graduates, which has resulted in targeted outputs being set by the government and the National Research Foundation. It is also in response to the concerns about low doctoral participation rates. But alongside these and other driving forces, the key push behind the development of the programme has been the provision of a community of practice that works against the ‘lonely space’ of the doctoral journey.
In South Africa, the doctorate is by full thesis only and no coursework can provide credits towards the qualification. The structures of the programme are thus not about accumulating credits but rather are about supporting the development of the research design, undertaking the research and writing the thesis. These structures include three ‘Doc Weeks’ a year that include guest seminars, debates, panel discussions, student presentations, workshops and so on. There is also a vibrant online classroom where academic readings are shared, controversial news items are deliberated upon, questions are asked and support is provided. Advisory panels, online meetings and other structures augment traditional supervision relationships and are all developed to give the scholars and supervisors a sense of belonging to a broader community.
Participation in these structures is voluntary. The excellent attendance at ‘Doc Weeks’, despite the financial implications of travelling long distances and taking leave from work, indicates that scholars are finding the support useful. Evaluations speak to a sense of ‘being part of a group’ and ‘all being in this together, looking out for one another’. Such structures require that the supervisors see the benefits of working with students within a community and are willing to participate to this community beyond their own individual supervision responsibilities. They benefit from having a whole network of people supporting and encouraging their students.
Tackling problems in doctoral education in South Africa will require a multi-pronged engagement but we believe that reconsidering the structure of the relationships of those involved is a good starting point.

The latest edition of the IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2) is now available online.
The In Focus section of the magazine includes 14 papers focusing on Innovative Approaches to Doctoral Education in Africa.
By Chrissie Boughey and Sioux McKenna, Rhodes University, South Africa (C.Boughey@ru.ac.za). Since 1994, the focus in South African higher education has been on the need to transform the fractured, unequal system of apartheid into a single coherent system that would serve all South Africans equally. In spite of the enormous amount of work which has gone into developing and implementing policies since that time, many of the old divides still remain, one of which relates to the capacity to produce research.
A small number of universities continue to produce the great majority of research outputs. These universities (Cape Town, Stellenbosch, the Witwatersrand, Pretoria and KwaZulu-Natal) produce more than 60% of articles published in accredited journals. The three most productive universities on a per capita basis are Cape Town, Stellenbosch and Rhodes. These also happen to be the universities with the highest proportion of doctoral graduates on their staff. All these research productive universities are historically white and have benefitted from the resourcing and prestige afforded to them under apartheid.
A report produced in 2010 by the Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf) makes a compelling case for increasing the number of doctoral graduates in the country if South Africa is to be able to compete meaningfully in a globalised economy. South Africa needs more doctoral graduates if it is to be able to compete yet, in a country striving for more equality, where are these graduates going to come from given that old divides of privilege appear to continue? Clearly the production of doctoral graduations needs to be increased and, importantly, evened out across the higher education system. The ASSAf report mentioned above, shows traditional universities (as opposed to universities of technology or ‘comprehensive’ universities – institutions offering a mix of vocational and disciplinary based programmes) as producing 80% of all doctoral graduates in the country.
Over the years, a number of alternative models of doctoral training have been developed in addition to the traditional oneon- one supervision of a piece of original research. These include doctorates by publication, taught doctoral programmes and the ‘professional’ doctorate which usually has specific outcomes. All require supervision of the doctoral candidate in some form, however, and it is here that the system often falls down.
Many supervisors supervise on the basis of their own experience of being supervised omitting to consider that the students they are now working with are very different to those who worked beside them in the past. In South Africa especially, the notion of ‘under preparedness’ continues right up to doctoral level and supervisors may be challenged by their students’ ability to work independently or even to write at an appropriate level. Students may also be more likely to pursue doctoral study on a part time basis and will need to juggle multiple demands in addition to those imposed by their research. What does all this mean for supervision and the supervisor who needs to guide her student?
It is not only ‘new’ students who have challenged supervision, however. New orientations to knowledge production along with an increased interest in interdisciplinarity may mean that supervisors are challenged at a methodological level by the projects their students want to pursue. Given these considerations, it is clear that an intervention with supervisors offers the promise of meeting many of the challenges involved in producing more doctoral graduates in South Africa. It is here that a recently developed course on doctoral supervision aims to play a role.
The course has been developed by a consortium of South African universities (Rhodes, Stellenbosch, Cape Town and Fort Hare) along with Dutch partners from the Vrije University of Amsterdam, the African Studies Centre in Leiden and the International Institute of Social Studies in The Hague. The development and roll out of the course has been funded by the Dutch government under the auspices of NUFFIC. Rhodes University is the lead partner in the project.
The course, which comprises three phases – an initial four day face to face workshop, a six week period of online engagement and a further three days of face to face teaching, has been piloted at three universities. Feedback from the pilots will be used to revise materials whereafter the roll out to other universities will commence. Dutch funding currently allows for the course to be offered free of charge to 18 of the 23 South African universities although attempts are now in progress to raise funding for all institutions to have the opportunity of the course being offered on their campus under the auspices of the project. Significantly, the course carries a Creative Commons license which means that any university will be able to use the materials on a non-profit basis to benefit its own staff in the future.
Response at the launch of the course at the National Research Foundation in Pretoria in November 2012 was extremely positive. Interest has also been indicated from universities beyond the borders of South Africa and, if funding becomes available, the consortium will be glad to respond.

The latest edition of the IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2) is now available online.
The In Focus section of the magazine includes 14 papers focusing on Innovative Approaches to Doctoral Education in Africa.
By Hilligje van’t Land, IAU Director Membership and Programme Development (h.vantland@iau-aiu.net). Universities around the world are the “thought leaders and knowledge providers in the required structural transformation process for the economy” (Aryeetey). To live up to this assumption and expectation, higher education institutions need to constantly enhance their teaching and research in order to generate the kind of research required to trigger innovation around the world. The same obviously applies to institutions in Africa.
To contribute significantly to the global debates, to ensure that the African institutions generate the kind of “experts and leaders of solutions” the African continent needs (Lungren), Higher Education leaders in the continent are rethinking African doctoral programmes and their management. The rethinking and reform processes initiated over the last two decades are bearing fruits (Ambali, Malete, Lima Fortes), yet they need to be pursued and developed further.
In order to contribute and stimulate the process, the IAU initiated the www.ideaphd. net Portal on Innovative Approaches to Doctoral Education in Africa (IDEA). Developed in partnership with Association for Catalan Public Universities (ACUP), it provides examples on how to develop and manage a PhD; shares information on very diverse national and international Projects and Initiatives; presents HEI profiles and lists various Funding opportunities. It also lists events relating to the topic and will soon become an exchange platform for leaders, programme managers and researchers administrators.
This In Focus section follows the same ‘logic’ in that it presents a series of papers contributed by experts from around Africa and beyond, in which they share their views on how to foster Capacity building, institutional reform and innovation, address the key challenges institutions face, in particular with regards to supervision, and discusses funding needs.
Capacity Building
African HEIs strive to ensure quality teaching and research in order to deliver the number of quality students wishing and capable of undertaking and successfully completing a doctoral programmes in a set time that the continent needs to address the challenges it faces. Some African HEIs need to develop into ‘world class’ universities (Aryettey) to attract the right professors, researchers and students from the continent and abroad who will jointly generate the kind of research needed locally, regionally and globally. Papers published here stress the importance to further reform and restructure doctoral programmes claiming that they should be able to perform better. Papers draw attention to the research is being carried out at IAU, EUA, ACU and ACUP projects, and by Cross and Backhouse, to enable institutions to compare, revisit, reform and enhance their doctoral programmes and their management practices strategically (Lundgren, Aryeetey, Lima Fortes, Sy).
Supervision
For doctoral students to become true researchers, autonomous critical thinkers, decision makers and innovators, who are able to develop original research questions – and even good communicators and true research ambassadors - , they need to be accompanied, trained and supervised adequately throughout their doctoral studies (Boughey and McKenna, Wainaina Mwaura). This is a challenge in itself since, with the massification of higher education on the one hand and the limited capacity at many institutions and far as academic and administrative staff is concerned, there are not enough supervisors available (see: Wainaina Mwaura). In addition, in order for supervision to be of quality, the authors argue that much attention needs to be devoted to training the trainers and supervisors adequately (Boughey and McKenna, Wainaina Mwaura). E-supervision is one avenue being investigated (see: Gmelch and Vilalta). The further development of solid, open and ‘equitable’ institutional and inter-institutional partnerships locally, regionally and internationally is also being investigated (see: Lima Fortes, Malete, Jorgensen, Aryeetey).
The role of funding
Substantial financial support is obviously essential. But funding should not only be sourced from international donors, as was and is often the case. Aryeetey, Ambali and Malete make the case for national university systems and individual institutions to be strengthened by governments to ensure the relevance of teaching and research locally and to ensure financial sustainability and, as a consequence, sustainability of programmes and HE systems as a whole (see: Lima Fortes, Lundgren, Ajai Ajagbe, Matondi and Tibugari).
Studies
Examples of exchange platforms offered by international organisations, like the EUA, ACU, ACUP and IAU, to promote inter-institutional dialogue and understanding and help enhance the development the development of networks, innovative partnerships and new cooperation are being highlighted. The papers give examples of research carried out in close cooperation with local institutions and experts have triggered innovative reform process (Ambali, Wainaina Mwaura, ACUP, ACU for instance). A number of new projects are also also presented (ACU, IAU, ACUP, Cross and Backhouse).
To contribute to the discussions and to enhance the portal, please go to the following website www.iau-aiu.net/content/doctoralprogrammes or contact the IAU at: h.vantland@iau-aiu.net.

The latest edition of the IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2) is now available online.
Working Group on Higher Education and Sustainable Development (WG-HESD) renewed.
The terms of Reference of the WG-HESD have been reviewed and adopted at the IAU Board Meeting, held in Manchester, in April. Building on the IAU Policy statement entitled: IAU Kyoto Declaration on Sustainable Development and the related activities, the Members of the WG-HESD advises the Administrative Board and the Secretary General on the overall positioning of IAU within this broad theme. More specifically the Working Group provides recommendations on initiatives and strategic partnerships to be pursued by IAU to enhance higher education’s contribution to sustainable development. The Group will also provide advice how to actively engage IAU Members and other experts in the areas as providing strategic direction for the further development of the global IAU portal on HESD (www. iau-hesd.net – see below) and will contribute to defining the IAU 2014 International Conference 2014 on Blending Higher Education and Traditional Knowledge for Sustainable Development.
The IAU Global Platform on Higher Education and Sustainable Development (HESD) fosters your actions towards sustainability online.
Our new portal on HESD is a collaborative platform aiming at centralising and disseminating information on activities and actions undertaken all over the world by Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and related to higher education and sustainable development. You can navigate the portal online at: www.iau-hesd.net and provide us with your feedback and comments on any aspect using the following form: www.iau-hesd.net/en/contact.
What is available (in English and French)?
A homepage featuring latest news, actions, projects, or documents relating to HESD; and additions featured;
A map localising institutions and organisations actively promoting HESD;
A global calendar listing events related to HESD;
A database linking key charts, declarations, other key documents on HESD;
A series of practices describing actions towards sustainability as undertaken by HEIs, organisations and the civil society;
Research tools.
Why contribute?
To showcase the wealth of your activities and lead others to develop similar or new innovative approaches to HESD;
To ensure the information published on the portal to be accurate and up-to-date.
To improve the existing information fed through desk top research and provided by Member Institutions.
Your University will receive full benefit for actions / documents / etc., submitted and full visibility online. Participation is free of charge and your input will not be reused without your prior consent.
How can you contribute to the platform?
Everyone can contribute. The HESD Portal will bring together the whole Higher Education Community:
Global, regional and national stakeholders: intergovernmental organisations, associations, nongovernmental and not-for-profit organisations working in the field of Higher Education. Countries Administrations, Ministries of Education, Academia, HE administrators;
Higher Education Institutions actors: thinkers, administrative staff, teachers, students.
Contributions:
You can share information and promote your work by entering related projects and documents, using the submission form: www.iau-hesd.net/en/node/1413 For future reference, thank you for providing IAU with the contact details for the person in charge of sustainable development activities at your institution (if such a person is appointed), including Title, Name, Function, E-mail.
The portal is being presented at different events organised by IAU Secretariat, IAU Members and UNESCO in the context of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (UN-DESD – www.unesco.org) and will act as gauge indicating the involvement of HEIs in the process and adherence to the principles. Milestones to be penned down in your agendas:
Iquitos, Peru, March 19-21 2014 – IAU International Conference on Blending Higher Education, Sustainable Development and Indigenous Knowledge (www.iau-aiu. net/content/international-conferences);
Aichi-Nagoya, Japan, 10-12 November 2014 – UNESCO World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development – Learning Today for a Sustainable Future (www.unesco.org/new/en/education/events/calendar-ofevents/ education-global-conferences/) Contact: Dr. Hilligje van’t Land (h.vantland@iau-aiu.net).
The IAU-HESD Project is undertaken with financial support from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida).

The latest edition of the IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2) is now available online.
Report on IAU Vth Global Meeting of Associations (GMA V). The IAU Vth Global Meeting of Associations (GMA V) was organized by IAU in collaboration with the Northern Consortium UK (NCUK) and the University of Salford. It took place at the impressive “The Lowry” building, in Salford Quays, Manchester UK.
This edition of the GMA focused on: Institutional Diversity in Higher Education: Advantage or Threat for Association? This theme was chosen for the meeting because it is key challenge for most higher education organisations, networks, and associations who are all operating in an era of rapidly increasing numbers and types of HEIs around the world. Indeed, this phenomenon calls for a deeper reflexion on how this trend will shape higher education globally, and what role higher education institutions and HEI networks can play in shaping the future landscape.
Over 70 participants took part in the day-and a half long meeting, including representatives of all the major regional HE associations: the African Association of Universities (AAU), the European University Association (EUA), the Arab Association of Universities (ArAU), the Union of Latin American Universities (UDUAL), the Association of Universities of Asia and the Pacific (AUAP), as well as the Agence universitaire de la Francophonie (AUF), the Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU), the Inter American Organization of Universities (IOHE) and national associations and specialized groups from Europe, Africa and North America and Australia.
The discussions began with a thought-provoking presentation by Prof. Ellen Hazelkorn, on Re-imaging Higher Education: Taking a Broader View of Diversity. She defined the concept of diversity and drew attention to: how core tasks diverge; what types of institutions there are; what programmes they focus on; research led or not and how; what student and staff profiles are. She also noted what kind of internal organizations the HEIs fare on –, its specific significance / positioning, mission and visions in the 21st Century; the drivers for the institutional changes over time; the values of diversity and why it is important to strengthen it. Her presentation is available online for you to consult and further reflect on.
Once again the GMA allowed participants from diverse backgrounds a a unique opportunity to interact in small groups of peers, to exchange ideas and practices, and to network closely with each other. There was also opportunity to learn more about the issues at stake in the British and Irish higher education sectors. The report on the GMA V discussions is available online, on the GMA webpages (www.iau-aiu.net/content/past-events). IAU would like to extend special thanks to John MacKenzie, Policy Officer to the Pro-Vice-Chancellor, International, and University of Salford for his invaluable organisational skills which contributed greatly to the success of this event. The IAU as well thanks its partners for its support and i-graduate for having sponsored this event. www.i-graduate.org

The latest edition of the IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2) is now available online.
By Ellen Hazelkorn, Dublin Institute of Technology, Ireland (ellen.hazelkorn@dit.ie). The global economic crisis (henceforth Crisis) is having a profound impact on higher education: increasing pressure for higher education institutions (HEIs) to demonstrate greater relevance to and better value-for-money for individuals and society. The continuing shift to the knowledge-based economy, and the rising demand for and costs of higher education, are occurring at the same time that many governments face financial strain – with a knock-on effect on higher education budgets. At the same time, HEIs jockey for an improved position at national or international level as global rankings boost competition, placing issues of quality and performance under intense scrutiny. Faculty are also under pressure; calls for greater productivity and accountability challenge traditional work-practices and values.
Many of these challenges were manifest decades ago, but the confluence of factors associated with the Crisis has intensified their impact. It has become commonplace to say that HEIs need to “do more with less” but the changes being experienced now are not transitory modifications. Rather, these developments are combining to bring about a transformation in our broadly-accepted model of mass higher education. There is, however, a lack of deep-level evidence on what is actually happening in higher education: on the extent of change taking place, and on the impact on institutional priorities, quality and educational programmes, student choice and participation, resources and academic work.
An on-going study by the Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT), in association with the International Association of Universities (IAU), aims to fill this gap in the knowledge of leaders, policy-makers and researchers. Using data on 34 institutions from 29 different countries, the study focuses on five key themes: mission, strategy, finance, quality and work practices. Institutions completed a web-based self-study between August 2012 and May 2013. Every continental region is represented at least once, although the majority of institutions are from Europe (52.9%); 80% are based in metropolitan areas with populations of over 50,000 people and were established from 1900 onwards, with 38% being established since 1970. Fifty per cent of respondents described themselves are research-informed or research-intensive. Participating institutions gathered for a Roundtable discussion on 10-11 June 2013, hosted by the Irish Higher Education Authority (HEA) to share their experiences, talk about some of the main issues and challenges they face, discuss how these issues can be addressed, and share good practices. These discussions will feed into the final report.
Preliminary results shows that the global economic crisis has affected all types and ages of HEIs with varying degrees of severity (see Figure 1). Almost 77% of respondents said the global crisis had made it more difficult for their institution to achieve its mission and goals. Fifty-six per cent respondents say they have been “quite a lot” or “very much” affected with respect to the income they receive or earn This affects not only the total income received or earned but the proportion between different sources. HEIs anticipate that the proportion of funding received directly from government will continue to fall over the years to 2015 while the proportion of institutional income constituted by research grants is likely to increase. Interestingly, respondents think that tuition fees are likely to remain relatively static as a proportion of income.
Accordingly, HEIs are making reductions in administration support, faculty recruitment, travel to conferences and meetings, and library budgets (see Figure 2). In an effort to find a sustainable business model, HEIs are looking at making wide ranging changes, including increasing academic workload; increasing class size; reducing or ceasing recruitment of staff; re-structuring institutional departments; improving procurement practices; and reducing salary overheads. The final report will be made available on the IAU website later in 2013; a notice about this will be included in a later version of this newsletter. In the meantime, if you would like to hear more about this study, please do not hesitate to contact Ellen Hazelkorn (ellen.hazelkorn@dit.ie).