Formation Continue du Supérieur

The latest edition of the IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2) is now available online.
The Market University? by Gilles Breton, Graduate School of International and Public Affairs, University of Ottawa, Canada
In what conditions were Market Universities created? (Elizabeth Poop Berman, Creating the Market University: How Academic Science Became an Economic Engine, Princeton University Press, 2012, Princeton, 265p – ISBN: 9780691147086).
How is it that, even in the academic world, market logic has managed to stand out despite the presence of a strong institutional logic, that of science? There are two main types of responses to these questions. The first one provides general answers, which still embrace either globalization or the rise of neo-liberalism. The other type of response, more empirical in nature, considers the search for additional revenue by higher education institutions and the demands of industry for university research that better meets its needs as the two major factors that have led universities to increasingly integrate the market logic.
The work of Elizabeth Poop Berman offers – from the American perspective – an original response, more political and institutional in nature, to the involvement of universities in economic activities through market logic. The thesis defended in this book is based on the following main arguments: it is the American Government which, in the middle of the 1970s, encourages universities to consider scientific research as a product that may prove to be economically viable while, at the same time, the idea of making scientific and technological innovation the vector of economic activity becomes the new project of political, economic and academic decision-makers, thus bringing the universities to redefine their mission and especially their involvement in the economy.
This translates, within academic institutions, by the passage of “science as a resource” to “science as a driver of economic activity”. That is to say that universities have abandoned the model which dominated until the 1970s, where their involvement in the economic activity was limited to providing basic research from which industries solved their problems and advanced technologically, to adopt a new model where science and research can now be used as an engine of the economy through a scientific production that pulls the innovation from which new areas of economic activities can be created or existing sectors may be transformed.
It is by relying on solid empirical research that the author brings to light the creation of the Market University. More specifically, three case studies are conducted that focus on the development of entrepreneurship by professors in the biosciences, the new development and management of patents by universities and finally, the study of the creation of industry-university research centres. These three case studies are conducted in light of the concept of institutional logic. The author shows how tensions evolved between market institutional logic (or capitalism), which evaluates the relevance of science by the value of its production on the market on the one hand, and scientific institutional logic, for which it is in the search for truth and the production of new knowledge that lies its intrinsic value on the other hand.
In her analysis, it appears that political decisions specific to each of the three cases studied were the main factors in the transition to the Market University; that these decisions were taken in a rather short period of time, from the end of the 1970s to the beginning of the 1980s; that it was mainly university teaching staff and middle managers, not senior management, who were initially the main agents of this transformation and finally, that the concept of the Market University, if it falls within the neo-liberal project in the sense that all human activity is reduced to creating economic value, also fits into an economic rationalization project (in the Weberian sense) that aims to place universities in the dominant economic rationality of the moment, that of growth through innovation, in which the universities become one of the main drivers.
Creating the Market University is an important book that enables us to understand how the conflict at the heart of academia came about, and which compares two opposing university projects: university and science for public good versus university and science for the market. In addition, if the proposed analysis of this migration to the Market University opens research perspectives and avenues of comparison which are extremely stimulating and challenging, it also confirms that it is not enough to turn the Market University into a neo-liberal politico-ideological project in order to understand how it is implemented and becomes established in our institutions. With drawing from the Market University, or simply going beyond the sciencemarket conflict, requires a thorough understanding of the current situation if we want to develop something new in the academic world, based on solid evidence. Elizabeth Popp Berman’s book can surely help. Download IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2).

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.
Editorial, by Hilligje van’t Land, IAU Director Membership and Programme Development.
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 or contact the IAU. Download IAU Horizons (Vol. 19 No.2).

Propos recueillis par Yaël Selbonne. Stéphane Boiteux (IDRAC): "Le terme étudiant étranger est un mot risqué". Stéphane Boiteux, directeur général du groupe IDRAC, école de commerce installée dans sept villes (Paris, Lyon, Nice, Montpellier, Nantes, Toulouse, Grenoble), s’oppose à la mauvaise utilisation du terme "étudiant étranger". Selon lui, "étudiant" ne doit pas être associé à "étranger", au risque de diffuser une mauvaise image de la France à l’international! Il livre et explique son point de vue dans une interview exclusive à Orientations.
Quelle est la situation actuelle concernant les étudiants internationaux en France?
"Nous faisons partie des cinq premiers pays à accueillir des étudiants internationaux. Mais en 2009, nous étions le troisième pays d’accueil, nous sommes passés de 15% d’étudiants internationaux en 2000 à 13% en 2013… Il ne faudrait donc pas que la situation s’aggrave."
Dans une récente tribune, vous parlez d’une mauvaise perception des étudiants internationaux en France, affirmant que le terme "étranger" est véritablement lié à une façon négative d’appréhender les étudiants internationaux. N’est-ce pas simplement une erreur sémantique?
"Oui, tout à fait! Les étudiants du supérieur sont intégrés dans un dispositif de formation qui se mondialise. Ils doivent donc être considérés comme des étudiants internationaux. Nous pouvons parler de 'nationalité étrangère', mais pas 'd’étudiants étrangers'. C’est une erreur sémantique qui crée un frein à la mobilité, alors que nous devons créer des passerelles toujours plus nombreuses entre pays. Suite de l'article...

Les membres de la CPU ont adopté les grands principes suivants lors de leur réunion du 20 juin 2013. Ces éléments élaborés à partir des débats qui ont eu lieu à Rennes, et des propositions formulées auparavant par la CPU, en particulier dans le cadre des assises de l'enseignement supérieur et de la recherche, constituent une base de travail évolutive, qui a vocation à être discutée et enrichie, en lien avec les différents partenaires de la CPU, tout au long de l'année universitaire 2013-2014. Le bureau de la CPU a reçu mandat de ses membres pour commencer avec la DGRH des négociations sur la base de ces grands principes.
Proposition 21: Disciplines rares
La CPU propose dans un premier temps d’établir une cartographie des disciplines rares ou à faibles effectifs de manière à pouvoir avoir une vision globale de la situation des disciplines et de leur évolution en relation avec celle des effectifs étudiants et des chercheurs des organismes de recherche, et permettre ensuite d’élaborer un dispositif de soutien à ces disciplines au niveau national.
Les autres propositions
Les universités employeurs
Proposition 1 : Mettre en place dans les universités une politique de ressources humaines globale, cohérente et ambitieuse.
Proposition 2 : Placer la formation de tous les personnels au coeur de la stratégie RH.
Proposition 3 : Assurer un accompagnement et un suivi individuel et collectif de l’ensemble des personnels, tourné vers le développement des compétences, dans le cadre d’un dialogue social renforcé.
Proposition 4 : Encourager la mobilité de tous les personnels et corrélativement limiter l’endorecrutement.
Proposition 5 : Développer l’égalité femme‐homme et la parité dans les établissements.
Proposition 6 : Handicap : faire de l’université un modèle d’intégration citoyenne.
Proposition 7 : Elaborer une politique d’action sociale, élargie à la qualité de vie au travail, politiquement portée et soutenue par une structure identifiée.
Proposition 8 : Reconnaître l’ensemble des missions permettant aux personnels de bénéficier d’une progression de carrière.
Proposition 9 : Valoriser la formation doctorale.
Proposition 10 : Faire évoluer les statuts des PRAG‐PRCE (mobilité, activités, évaluation et carrière).
Proposition 11 : Intégrer systématiquement l’offre de formation numérique à la politique des établissements et définir des outils RH communs permettant à tous les établissements de mettre en place une offre de formation à distance de qualité.
Des modes d’organisation à repenser : vers une politique globale de ressources humaines par site
Proposition 12 : Concilier une vision stratégique centralisée avec un management professionnel de proximité.
Proposition 13 : Avoir une charte de bonne conduite RH pour les personnels contractuels harmonisée avec celle des organismes de recherche (transparence, entretiens, droit à formation, bilan social).
Proposition 14 : Concevoir la communication interne comme l’outil privilégié du développement du sentiment d’appartenance et de la culture commune.
L’articulation nécessaire entre le rôle de l’Etat et le rôle des établissements
Proposition 15 : Simplifier, harmoniser et rendre plus lisible la politique indemnitaire des établissements.
Proposition 16 : Aligner les règles de déroulement de carrière des PU‐PH et MCU‐PH sur les PR et MCF.
Proposition 17 : Mettre en place une voie spécifique de promotion des MCF en PR.
Proposition 18 : Modifier la procédure d’accès au corps des professeurs des universités pour les sections 1 à 6 du CNU.
Proposition 19 : Obtenir, pour les enseignants du second degré et les BIATSS, un contingent de promotions locales, qui, comme pour l'avancement des PR et des MCF, s'ajouterait au contingent de promotions nationales.
Proposition 20 : Simplifier corps et catégories des BIATSS. Télécharger les grands principes adoptés par la CPU.

Students from disadvantaged backgrounds will be supported in postgraduate study with up to £125 million of extra funding, Universities and Science Minister David Willetts announced today.
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) are focusing on increasing access to postgraduate education, which has been identified as a potential barrier to social mobility. An initial £25 million fund will distribute grants of between £500,000 and £3 million to universities and colleges to attract and support disadvantaged students into postgraduate education. 
After studying its success, the Government will then invest an additional £50m in removing financial or cultural barriers to participation in postgraduate education, as announced in the Spending Review. Extra funding will be expected from universities and businesses, bringing this to around £100 million. Read more...

"Erasmus+" est sur le point de devenir le prochain programme de l'UE pour l'éducation, la formation, la jeunesse et le sport, suite à un accord conclu entre les négociateurs du Parlement et du Conseil ce mercredi. Le budget global pour le nouveau programme dépend de l'accord sur le cadre financier pluriannuel (CFP) pour la période 2014-2020.
"Dès le début, le Parlement a toujours cherché à avoir un programme facile d'utilisation et nous sommes clairement parvenus à atteindre cet objectif", a déclaré Doris Pack (PPE, DE), qui a mené les négociations pour Parlement.
"Ce programme m'est cher. A l'avenir, les étudiants qui n'ont pas pu obtenir de bourses auront la possibilité d'obtenir des prêts à des conditions favorables pour étudier pendant une année ou deux de leur master dans un autre pays de l'UE."
"La dénomination "Erasmus+" montre que ce nouveau programme couvre davantage que la simple mobilité des étudiants. Nous avons renforcé les activités à destination des jeunes et pour la première fois, il y aura une ligne budgétaire séparée pour le sport", a-t-elle ajouté.
Informations générales
Le nouveau programme est composé de trois piliers principaux: l'éducation et la formation, la jeunesse et le sport. Sur l'enveloppe totale, 77,5% seront alloués au secteur de l'éducation et de la formation, 3,5% au mécanisme de garantie de prêts. Le secteur de la jeunesse bénéficiera de 10%, le sport de 1,8%. Les trois institutions se sont accordées en faveur d'une augmentation substantielle du budget du programme mais les chiffres finaux dépendent de l'issue des négociations sur le CFP.
La commission de la culture doit se prononcer sur cet accord et le texte final sera ensuite mis aux voix en plénière probablement en octobre.

Young people have long been an important focus of policy at EU level and this is particularly true today. The current EU Youth Strategy (2010–2018) has the challenging objectives of:

• providing more and equal opportunities for young people in education and in the labour market;
• encouraging young people to be active citizens and to participate in society.

Addressing the youth employment crisis is at the top of Europe's political agenda, giving rise to the European Commission's Youth Employment Package and the Youth Guarantee from the European Parliament and Council of the EU, among other measures. The strategy is committed to evidence-based policymaking and Eurofound's mission to provide knowledge to assist in developing social and work-related policies is highly relevant here. Eurofound's four-year work programme 2013–2016 includes as a priority 'Youth in Europe - improving prospects for all'. Read more...

Welcome Croatia! The European Union welcomes its 28th Member State
On 1st July 2013 Croatia joins the European Union, increasing the number of EU official languages to 24. DG Translation is welcoming the new Member State with a flag ceremony in Luxembourg (12:30-13:15), which will be webstreamed live.
Androulla Vassiliou (Commissioner for Education, Culture, Multilingualism, Sport, Media and Youth), Rytis Martikonis (Director-General of DG Translation) and Miljenka Prohaska Kragović, (Director of the Translation Centre of the Croatian Ministery of Foreign Affairs) will provide the official welcome, accompanied by representatives of the Croatian diplomatic corps and the staff of the European institutions.
To start and end the ceremony, Nikolina Korečić (translator at DGT and professional opera singer) will perform the Croatian and European anthems.