The Boston College Center for International Higher Educationand in ways that meet our national...

1

International Issues

INTERNATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATIONThe Boston College Center for International Higher Education

Number 34 Winter 2004

2 Knowledge Is Not a Product To Be Bought or Sold: A SouthAfrican PerspectiveKader Asmal

3 New Rationales Driving InternationalizationJane Knight

5 National Leaders and Quality ReviewJudith S. Eaton

7 The Question of CorruptionPhilip G. Altbach

9 Ethics in BotswanaIndra Riddoch and Bruce J. Riddoch

10 Corruption in GeorgiaNatia Janashia

12 Graduate Employment: Issues for Debate and InquiryJohn Brennan

14 Affordability, Access, Costing in the U.S. and U.K.David Palfreyman

16 Lessons of Experience: Reform Initiatives in African UniversitiesDamtew Teferra

18 The African Virtual University—Developments andCritiquesMoses O. Oketch

20 Whither Private Higher Education in Africa?Mahlubi Mabizela

21 China: Regulation and Scale of Foreign ActivityRichard Garrett

23 Higher Education Reform in the Balkans: the Bologna ProcessAnthony W. Morgan

25 News of the Center25 New Publications

Departments

Special Focus: Corruption in Academe

Special Focus: Economic Issues

Special Focus: Africa

Countries and Regions

INTERNATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION2

E-Learning International Issues

Knowledge Is Not a Product tobe Bought or Sold: A SouthAfrican PerspectiveKader AsmalKader Asmal is an ANC National Executive Committee member andMinister of Education.

There can be little argument that knowledge is thewellspring of economic and social development. It

is thus imperative for a country like South Africa that itshigher education institutions become innovative, high-quality powerhouses of knowledge production and dis-semination. To succeed in this endeavor, the reformagenda has to take full cognizance of the need for effi-ciency, effectiveness, and responsiveness. However, it ispossible and indeed necessary to do so without sacrific-ing social accountability and without subservience to the“market.” A tall order, some might say in light of increas-ing pressure to commercialize or commodify education.

In a country like South Africa, and especially at thisimportant point in its history, the transformation ofhigher education has to be seen in the context of thebroader reconstruction and development of the country.In particular, it has to respond to the dual challenges ofequity and development—that is, to overcome thefragmentation and inequality of the past and to meetcurrent and future development challenges, especiallyin the context of an increasingly globalizing environment.

An important element of our agenda in highereducation is to focus on quality. Only through dueattention to quality, including the building of inclusiveinstitutional cultures, can there be meaningful access tohigher education especially for those who were deniedopportunities in the past. Only through combiningaccess, quality, and success will the system be able toerode the domination of high-level occupations andknowledge production by privileged social groups.Quality improvement must, of course, include attentionto the curriculum and to teaching and learning support.

Clearly, no education system exists in isolation.However, an appropriate balance should be struckbetween global, local, or regional imperatives. In particular,the engagement of South Africa’s higher education systemwith the global order has to be guided by nationalobjectives. To ignore this is to run the risk of furtherentrenching the unequal power relations between thedeveloped and developing worlds. This can be illustratedby reference to the proliferation of foreign higher educationinstitutions establishing operational bases in SouthAfrica—either independently or in some cases inpartnership with local public and private institutions.

Prior to the promulgation of the 1997 HigherEducation Act, there was a policy vacuum with respectto the regulation of private higher education, both localand foreign. This gap was exploited by overseasinstitutions, especially from countries threatened bydeclining student numbers and revenue, that set upshop in South Africa. Regrettably, many of theseinstitutions appear to be driven by concerns largelyunrelated to human resources development prioritiesor equity imperatives that are driving change in SouthAfrica.

Fortunately, through the implementation of ourpolicy and legal frameworks, South Africa has been ableto ensure the planned development of the private sectorin ways that do not threaten the sustainability andintegrity of the higher education system as a whole. Thisis not an attempt to exclude foreign institutions butrather to ensure that those who operate in South Africado so with due regard to our policy goals and prioritiesand in ways that meet our national transformationagenda and quality assurance requirements.

We have not allowed increased trade in educationto undermine our national efforts to transform highereducation and, in particular, to strengthen the publicsector so that it can effectively participate in anincreasingly globalizing environment. We cannot alsocountenance the excessive marketization andcommodification of higher education, which amongother factors can lead to the unfortunatehomogenization of academic approaches and to theundermining of institutional cultures and academicvalues.

No education system exists in isola-tion. However, an appropriate bal-ance should be struck between global,local, or regional imperatives.

In large measure, this experience has shaped SouthAfrica’s unfolding response to the General Agreementon Trade in Services (GATS)—an accord of the WorldTrade Organization covering international trade inservices that came into force in January 1995. The verydesignation of education as a service is a fundamentalproblem if one accepts that education is not acommodity to be bought and sold. As trade and industryminister Alec Erwin has so eloquently stated,“Knowledge is not a commodity and can never be one.Knowledge is the distillation of human endeavor and itis the most profound collective good that there is.” Erwingoes on to argue that the more knowledge is turned

3

into a commodity and privatized “the more it willeither corrode the collective knowledge base or itselfcorrode as it distances itself from that collectivewellspring.”

Education is not merely a value-free instrument forthe transfer of skills across national and regionalboundaries, as some might like us to believe. On thecontrary, education must embrace the intellectual,cultural, political, and social development of individuals,institutions, and nations. This “public good” agendashould not be held hostage to the vagaries of the market.

International “trade” in education services,particularly at the higher education level, has grownsignificantly in the past period, with increasing numbersof students studying outside their home countries,increased international marketing of academic programs,and the establishment of overseas “branch campuses,”etc.

It should come as no surprise that the movement ofstudents and staff is mainly from South to North, whileexport of educational services in the form, among others,of educational information, provision, and facilities (e.g.,branch campuses) is in the reverse direction.

Education is not merely a value-free in-strument for the transfer of skills acrossnational and regional boundaries.

We believe that the internationalization of highereducation is better addressed using conventions andagreements outside of a trade policy regime. We willcontinue to lobby key bodies such as UNESCO tochampion this approach. We will also continue to buildand strengthen our bilateral and multilateralpartnerships.

I hope that the effects of trade liberalization on effortsto internationalize higher education can be minimized.However, of some concern is whether already limitedfinancial resources might increasingly be used for trade-driven activities rather than those that emphasizeintellectual and social gains. I am convinced that afundamental rethinking of the inclusion of education inGATS is needed. We must avoid, at all cost, an approachto GATS that puts our education in peril. Only time willtell whether it is indeed possible to engage with GATSin ways that hold promise for our own agendas andneeds.

This is an edited version of a speech presented at a confer-ence on higher education in Bergen, Norway.

New Rationales DrivingInternationalizationJane KnightJane Knight is an adjunct professor at the Comparative, Internationaland Development Education Centre, Ontario Institute for Studies in Edu-cation, University of Toronto, Canada. Address: 62 Wellesley St. W.Suite 1906, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 2X3. E-mail:[email protected].

Given the changes and challenges facing the inter-national dimension of higher education in a more

globalized world, the importance of having clearly ar-ticulated rationales for internationalization cannot beoverstated. Rationales are reflected in the objectives,policies, and programs that are developed and eventu-ally implemented. Rationales dictate the kind of ben-efits or expected outcomes one would expect frominternationalization efforts. Without a clear set of ration-ales, the process of internationalization is often an adhoc and fragmented reaction to the overwhelming num-ber of new international opportunities available. The lastdecade has seen some important and discernible shiftsin the rationales driving internationalization.

National Level RationalesTraditionally, the rationales driving internationalizationhave been divided into four groups: social/cultural,political, academic, and economic. These generic catego-ries remain a useful way to analyze rationales. However,there are new and emerging rationales that cannot beneatly placed in one of these four groups.

Human Resources Development. The knowledge economy,demographic shifts, mobility of the labor force, and in-creased trade in services are factors driving nations toplace more importance on developing and recruitinghuman capital or brain power through internationaleducation initiatives. There are signs of heightened pres-sure and interest to recruit the brightest students andscholars from other countries to increase scientific, tech-nological, and economic competitiveness.

Strategic Alliances. The international mobility of studentsand academics as well as collaborative research and edu-cation initiatives are being seen as productive ways todevelop closer geopolitical ties and economic relation-ships. There has been a definite shift from alliances forcultural purposes to those based on economic interests.

Commercial Trade. In the last decade, more emphasishas been placed on economic and income-generating


opportunities. New franchise arrangements, foreign orsatellite campuses, on-line delivery, and increased re-cruitment of fee-paying students are examples of a morecommercial approach to internationalization. The factthat education is now one of the 12 service sectors in theGeneral Agreement on Trade in Services is positive proofthat importing and exporting education programs andservices is a potentially lucrative trade area.

Nation Building. While some countries are interested inthe export of education, others are interested in import-ing education programs and institutions for nation-building purposes. An educated, trained, andknowledgeable citizenry and workforce able to do re-search and generate new knowledge are key componentsof a country’s nation-building agenda.

While some countries are interested inthe export of education, others are in-terested in importing education pro-grams and institutions for nation-building purposes.

Social and Cultural Development. The social/cultural ra-tionales, especially those that relate to intercultural un-derstanding and national cultural identity are stillsignificant; but perhaps their importance does not carrythe same weight in comparison to the economic andpolitical rationales listed above. It is yet to be seenwhether, in light of the pressing issues stemming fromculturally based clashes within and between countries,there will be more interest and importance attached tothe social and cultural rationales.

Institutional-Level RationalesOf course, a relationship exists between national andinstitution-based rationales, but not always as close asone would expect. This depends on many factors, oneof which is how much the internationalization processis a bottom-up or top-down process within any givencountry. Again, the four categories of rationales applyto institutions, but it appears that other emerging ration-ales are of greater consequence.

International Profile and Reputation. Traditionally, promi-nence has been given to the goal of achieving interna-tional academic standards (no matter how they may bedefined). This motivation appears, however, to have beensubsumed by the overall drive to achieve a strong world-wide reputation or “brand” name as an international

high-quality institution. This drive relates to the questfor name recognition internationally in an attempt toattract the brightest of scholars and students, a substan-tial number of international students, and high-profileresearch and training projects.

Student and Staff Development. There seems to be renewedemphasis on internationalization as a means of enhanc-ing the international and intercultural understandingand skills of students and staff. The escalating numberof national, regional, international, and cultural conflictsare pushing academics to help students understand glo-bal issues and international and intercultural relation-ships. The mobility of the labor market and culturaldiversity in communities and work places require thatboth students and academics have an increased under-standing and skills to work and live in a culturally di-verse or different environment.

Income Generation. On the other side of the ledger fromhuman development is the motivation of economic de-velopment. There is no question that more institutionsare increasingly looking for internationalization activi-ties as a way of generating alternative sources of income.For-profit internationalization is a growing phenom-enon. Another key factor is the growth in the number ofnew private commercial providers who are primarily inbusiness to generate income on a for-profit basis.

Traditionally, prominence has beengiven to the goal of achieving interna-tional academic standards.

Strategic Alliances. The number of bilateral or multilat-eral educational agreements has increased exponentiallyin the past decade. Linkages can be for different pur-poses: academic mobility, bench marking, joint curricu-lum or program development, seminars and conferences,and joint research initiatives. It is often the case that in-stitutions cannot support a large number of agreements,many of which are thus inactive and mainly paper-basedarrangements. All in all, the rationale for developing keystrategic international education alliances at both thenational and institutional level is not so much an endunto itself but a means of achieving academic, scientific,economic, technological, or cultural objectives.

Research and Knowledge Production. Given the increasinginterdependence among nations, it is clear there are glo-bal issues and challenges that cannot be addressed at

5

the national level alone. International and interdiscipli-nary collaboration is key to solving many global prob-lems such as those related to environmental, health, orcrime issues. Institutions and national governments are,therefore, continuing to make the international dimen-sion of research and knowledge production a primaryrationale for internationalization of higher education.

All in all, the rationales driving internationalizationvary from institution to institution, from stakeholderto stakeholder, and from country to country. Differingand competing rationales contribute to both thecomplexity of the international dimension ofeducation and the substantial contributions thatinternationalization makes to higher education andthe role it plays in society.

A clearer articulation of the values guidinginternationalization is becoming increasingly important.Why? Values give shape and meaning to the rationalesand expected outcomes that underpin institutions’ andnations’ drive to internationalize. There is room forgreater reflection and clarity in the articulation of thevalues, especially cooperation and competition and thepositioning of education as a “public” or “privategood,” in the provision of higher education.

National Leadership andInternational Quality Reviewin Higher EducationJudith S. EatonJudith S. Eaton is president of the Council for Higher EducationAccreditation (CHEA). Address: CHEA, 1 Dupont Circle, #510,Washington, DC 20036, USA. E-mail: [email protected].

As national leaders in countries around the worldcontinue to respond to questions about higher

education operation and quality internationally, con-siderable debate has arisen over what role this na-tional leadership itself plays in establishingexpectations of quality in an international environ-ment. How can national leaders build an internationalcommunity and on what basis? What are the corecommitments on which to base policies, practices, andvalues associated with quality in an international set-ting? International quality review or quality review in aninternational setting refers to the policies, practices, andprocedures used by higher education and the qualityassurance and accreditation community to scrutinize thequality of higher education institutions and programschoosing to operate internationally.

National LeadershipThe primary task of creating an international culturefor quality review falls to national leaders of bothhigher education and quality assurance. The leadersneed to forge basic ties and connections among coun-tries to create an international culture grounded inrigorous and responsive approaches to quality. Par-ticipants in this culture may include colleges, univer-sities, accreditation and quality assurance bodies,national organizations working together, regionalorganizations, and international organizations. Itstools may be national and international clearing-houses, bilateral and multilateral quality assuranceagreements, codes of practice, electronic databases,and other communication networks.

What are the core commitments onwhich to base policies, practices, andvalues associated with quality in aninternational setting?

National leaders have considered several optionsabout how to organize this important effort. Theserange from (1) national leaders creating appropriatenetworks to undertake international quality review,to (2) national leaders ceding responsibility for qualityto an international quality assurance or accreditationentity of some sort, to (3) relying on otherinternational organizations (rather than nationalleaders) to frame international quality review issuesand approaches (e.g., the World Trade Organization).

National leaders also must address significantdifferences of opinion about standards forinternational quality review. Some quality assuranceleaders favor a single template of standards to whichall national quality assurance organizations (and thushigher education institutions) would be subject.Others are more comfortable with an organic modelin which higher education institutions and qualityassurance organizations in different countries wouldmake individual judgments about quality and affiliatewith each other on this basis—a multiple standardsapproach to quality in an international setting.

Core Commitments and National LeadershipWhatever the decisions about how to organize an inter-national quality culture and how to approach standardsfor quality, three core commitments stand out as essen-tial to sound and effective conduct of quality review inan international setting.


Core commitment 1: Bringing the vital academic roles of highereducation to an international setting. Higher education andquality assurance leaders in many countries embrace ashared vision and common understanding of the vital rolesthat higher education has played for generations to servethe individual and society. While carried out in many dif-ferent ways, these roles include (1) contributing to the in-tellectual development of the individual; (2) sustaining,interpreting, enriching, and transmitting culture; (3) de-veloping an informed citizenry; (4) contributing to a skilledworkforce; (5) generating knowledge to build a vitaleconomy, and improve the health and well-being of citi-zens and communities; and (6) helping government, busi-ness, and community groups to use research to addresslocal problems.

National higher education leaders are naturaladvocates for the extension of these academic roles intoan international setting. Quality assurance leaders supportthese roles by affirming they are carried out at anappropriate level of quality.

In general, the “public good” responsi-bility of higher education refers to tak-ing actions that are in the interests ofsociety.

Core commitment 2: Higher education as a public good in aninternational setting. Each of the vital roles of higher educa-tion described above has a significant history of contribu-tion to the public good. In general, the “public good”responsibility of higher education refers to taking actionsthat are in the interests of society that (1) enhance publicwell-being rather than focus exclusively on private inter-ests and (2) are not carried out by other sectors of society(e.g., business, the judiciary). For higher education, “serv-ing the public good” means addressing issues such as ac-cess and equity in educational opportunity. It means anemphasis on education for citizenship and societal well-being as perhaps more important than education for indi-vidual gain that may be unrelated to social improvement.This is in contrast to, for example, higher education pri-marily in the service of the market or commercial inter-ests.

In a similar vein, an “international public good” canalso be sustained and encouraged. National highereducation and quality assurance leaders further an“international public good” when they assure that highereducation and quality review in an international settingalso support the vital roles of higher education as describedabove. This means that, for example, internationalinstruments such as bilateral or regional arrangements

among countries would further the development of acitizenry knowledgeable and responsive to internationalneeds and discourage dubious providers of highereducation or “diploma mills.”

Leadership also honors this commitment to the publicgood in an international setting when engaging in ongoingconsultation and deliberation about key values in highereducation and quality review that relate to the public good.This commitment means that effective international qualityreview will routinely include conversations among theseleaders about, for example, the important role of generaleducation and the liberal arts in various societies. It meansattention to the relationship between intellectualdevelopment, the dignity of human life, and thedevelopment of society.

Core commitment 3: The value of diversity of higher educationin an international setting. Diversity of higher educationwithin various countries usually refers to the range of in-stitutional types available within the society: public andprivate institutions and teaching and research institutions.Diversity in an international setting refers not only to pre-serving and enhancing variation in institutional type butalso to preserving the various cultural and intellectual tra-ditions associated with colleges and universities in differ-ent countries. Colleges and universities are influenced bythe history and culture in which they are located and bringthese diverse practices and perspectives to the internationalcommunity. Effective international quality review is builton, first and foremost, honoring and supporting these prac-tices and perspectives.

Grounding international quality review in the existingnetwork of national higher education and qualityassurance leaders supports this diversity. It honors nationaldifferences. It requires that considerations of quality areaddressed carefully, calling for analysis of thosedimensions of quality that are more culturally dependentand those that are less culturally dependent in any society.

The role of national leaders offered here positionsquality review of higher education in an internationalsetting as an enterprise that derives its legitimacy andauthority from the national higher education communityworking with national quality assurance and accreditationorganizations. The core commitments provide a vision ofa diverse international culture of higher educationinstitutions continuing to carry out their vital academicroles in relation to the individual and society in the contextof serving the public good.

This article is based on the September 2003 CHEA Letter fromthe President, “Do We Need an International Confederation forQuality Review of Higher Education?” available atwww.chea.org/research.

7

The Question of Corruption inAcademePhilip G. AltbachPhilip G. Altbach is Monan professor of higher education and directorof the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College.

Corruption in higher education is not a topic muchdiscussed in academic circles. Academic institutions

see themselves as somehow above the baser motivationsand lower instincts of other elements of society. Andsociety generally believes that universities are somehowspecial institutions imbued with the virtues of integrity.Yet, corruption in various manifestations is an elementof higher education in many parts of the world. It is timeto open a discussion of the meaning and scope of cor-ruption since it seems to be an expanding phenomenon,especially in parts of the world facing severe economichardships. Academic institutions in these countries comeunder extreme pressure to provide access and degreesto ensure success in difficult economic circumstances.

The dictionary definition of corruption will sufficewell for academe—“impairment of integrity, virtue, ormoral principle.” It goes on to say—“inducement towrong by improper or unlawful means.” Although thereare global guides for societal transparency anddemocratic government, no one has developed aworldwide academic corruption index. Yet, we knowfrom limited research and news reports that countriesand some academic institutions are prone to corruptpractices of various kinds. Hardly any academic systemis completely immune from at least some elements ofcorruption. Scandals in intercollegiate athletics,including such problems as admitting unqualifiedstudents who can play football and allowing cheatingon exams to ensure athletes’ eligibility to play, arecommon in the United States, and occasional lapses inacademic honor codes have occurred. There have beencases of corporate interference with research projects orfinancial shenanigans by members of boards of trustees,senior administrators, or professors. Oral examinationarrangements at some European universities haveoccasionally been unfairly manipulated. But when suchmalfeasance is detected, it is usually publicly exposedand the perpetrators disciplined. The academic systemitself is not corrupt, and efforts are made to cleanse theinstitutions. The key point is that the traditional valuesof the university are honored and deviations from themare seen as aberrations and as unacceptable behavior.

This is in sharp contrast to academic systems thatallow significant and persistent institutional as well asindividual corruption at many levels and, moreimportantly, where academic norms of honesty and

meritocratic values are pushed to the side. The litany ofproblems is unfortunately long and disturbing. A fewexamples will suffice. Admission to universities is forsale in some parts of the world. Well-connectedapplicants or those who bribe or otherwise influence theacademic authorities responsible for admissions, or thosewho can manipulate the admissions process gain entryregardless of their academic qualifications. In suchsituations, graduation is a virtual certainty, whether ornot a student completes the required academic work.Admission is tantamount to graduation—and theprocess is sometimes smoothed by further bribery orinfluence peddling. Professors may offer “tutorial”sessions to applicants to the university or those alreadyenrolled that often require considerable payments thatserve as bribes for entry or success.

Professorial CorruptionAcademic posts are often “sold” in the sense that thoseseeking appointments to lectureships or professorshipsmust curry favor with selection committees through giftsor other emoluments. In some cases, academic posts areawarded on the basis of ethnic or religious backgrounds.Research and publications may be corrupted. Plagiarismin publications can be found in every academic system,but in some it is widespread and tacitly accepted—atleast no one asks many questions, and the penalties fordetection are few, if any. Research results or even entireresearch projects can be falsified. Corruption may alsoinvolve the promotion process. Candidates can bribe orotherwise sway promotion committees, or outside pres-sure may be brought to bear in the process. In universi-ties with a rigid academic hierarchy, senior academicsoften promote their friends or perhaps colleagues with-out regard to the qualifications of the candidates.

The litany of problems is unfortunatelylong and disturbing.

ExaminationsThe examination system, which is central to themeritocratic core of the university, is a common site forcorruption. In India, for example, cheating is so wellestablished in some parts of the country that when uni-versities try to crack down, students protest and demandtheir traditional “right” to cheat. The litany of meansused to cheat on examinations is long and, in a perverseway, an indication of the inventiveness of a corrupt sys-tem. Examination proctors (invigilators) are sometimesbeaten or even killed by students for conscientiously

E-Learning Special Focus: Corruption in Academe


doing their jobs. In some places, professors or adminis-trators collude with students by selling them examina-tion papers in advance or by “fixing” the results. Inothers, students manage to steal examinations and sellthem in advance to others. In the United States, Internet-based firms are now selling research papers to under-graduate students, who then sometimes submit thepapers as their own. Recent American surveys indicatethat a significant proportion of students admit to cheat-ing on examinations from time to time. In countrieswhere oral examinations are common, there are furtherpossibilities for corruption.

The examination system, which is cen-tral to the meitocratic core of the uni-versity, is a common site for corruption.

Causes and EffectsThe many reasons behind academic corruption can becomplicated. There is a clear correlation between eco-nomic factors and corruption. Where academic institu-tions are congenitally short of money and thus undergreat pressure to admit students, there is an increasedlikelihood for corruption. Faculty and administratorsmay be looking for ways to supplement woefully inad-equate salaries in societies lacking other opportunitiesfor employment. External pressures to admit and pro-mote students are immense as well. While not allunderfunded academic systems are corrupt—indeedmost universities now face difficult financial circum-stances—institutions that experience “permanent pov-erty” in societies that offer few options for the highlyeducated are more exposed to the lures of academic cor-ruption. There are strong links, of course, between soci-etal corruption and corruption in academe. Indeed, sinceuniversities in reality are not Ivory Towers, they aregreatly affected by societal norms—and corruption is anelement of social and economic life in many countries.Societies that do not have well-developed meritocraticnorms are often prone to academic corruption—the ideathat someone can be promoted or can receive an aca-demic degree because he or she is from a particular groupor has certain familial links is seen as acceptable.

The traditions of higher education also play a role.Universities everywhere have European roots andorganizational patterns—they may not be well suited tosome non-Western societies. This historical disjunctionmay make it easier for corruption to take hold. Further,in many developing countries, universities were part ofa colonial system, and the values of subservience were

to some extent put into place by the colonial powers.Countries without deep academic traditions may alsohave looser ties to the traditional values of academe.

Academic systems that are politicized and inwhich nonacademic norms of many kinds impingeon universities may also be more prone to corruption.Political parties may be active on campus, seeking todominate academic governance bodies and to puttheir followers into positions of influence. Studentsmay be involved in activist movements that have littleregard to the universities or the norms of academiclife. Government or other external agencies may beworking to shape academic decisions. Weak academicleadership may also be responsible for permittingcorruption to entrench itself in the university.Sometimes, the organization of the universityprevents strong leadership from emerging.

The effects of corruption on campus are extensive.Corruption destroys the very core of the university—the concept of meritocracy and the dominance ofhonest academic inquiry and excellence in teachingand research. The effects can be seen in things largeand small. Corrupt admissions arrangements meanthat the best students may not be admitted. Corruptpromotion policies mean that the best minds are notrewarded, and that many will not even wish to bepart of the academic community. Funds are misused,and the result is that libraries and laboratories do nothave the support they need.

The academic community itself mustunderstand that without integrity andmeritocracy there can be no true uni-versity.

ConclusionUniversities require an effective civil society as muchas nations do. The academic system needs basic fi-nancial support so that it is possible to provide effec-tive teaching and engage in creative research.Universities need to be permitted the autonomy re-quired to build and support academic culture andvalues. Perhaps most importantly, the academic com-munity itself must understand that without integrityand meritocracy there can be no true university. Thereality of corruption in higher education must be rec-ognized as a central problem to be analyzed, under-stood, and rooted out. A first step is to recognize itsnature and scope.

9

A Question of Ethics: Tertiary-Level Teaching in BotswanaIndra Riddoch and Bruce J. RiddochIndra Riddoch teaches in the Department of Basic Sciences, BotswanaCollege of Agriculture, Private Bag 0027, Gaborone, Botswana. E-mail:[email protected]. Bruce J. Riddoch teaches in the Department ofBiological Sciences, University of Botswana, Private Bag 0022,Gaborone, Botswana. E-mail: [email protected].

Botswana, like many smaller developing nations, hasone university (the University of Botswana),

through which all degrees are awarded, includingthose earned at its sister institute, the Botswana Col-lege of Agriculture. However, unlike most develop-ing nations, since independence in 1966 Botswana hasgrown from one of the poorest countries in the worldto one with a stable and vibrant economy. This hasenabled it to aspire to a tertiary education systemequal to any in the developed world.

An integral part of this aspiration involvedemployment of expatriate academic staff while local staffacquired training. This system has proved a mixedblessing. Most expatriates are employed on two-yearcontracts, with little critical examination of their credentials(e.g., no interviews below the professorial level and noanalysis of teaching or research performance beyond yearsof experience and crude paper counts). Furthermore,localization has been approached through the fast-trackingof citizens, with little opportunity to accumulateappropriate experience. This strategy, together with a lackof effective quality assurance and accountability, has ledto the use of unethical behavior, notably in teaching andresearch, to achieve contract renewal or promotion.Research problems have been discussed elsewhere (e.g.,an article by I. Riddoch, in Nature, vol. 408, 2000). The focushere is on unethical teaching practices in tertiaryinstitutions in Botswana, and their wider implications.

In practice, teaching appraisal is based on a few ratherunreliable criteria that are used inconsistently, makingabuses easy to mask and perpetuate. Essentially all alecturer has to do is have a high apparent teaching loadand ensure a high pass rate. Consequently, most abusesare aimed at reducing teaching effort, through plagiarismand abandonment of teaching responsibilities andavoiding accountability, by exam-directed teaching andmanipulation of marks.

Inflation, Plagiarism, and AbandonmentThe illusion of intense teaching activity and creativ-ity is maintained by setting up specialized advancedlevel graduate courses with small classes (student num-bers being irrelevant to appraisal), which creates the

impression of a high teaching load with conceptuallymore demanding courses. Once courses have been as-signed colleagues and superiors display little or no cu-riosity about how or what students are taught. Asignificant proportion of classroom periods are, quite lit-erally, abandoned. Actual teaching frequently com-mences a week or two into a semester and finishes a weekor two before its end. The current deputy vice chancel-lor (for academic affairs) of the university recently rep-rimanded the entire academic staff, for this avoidanceof teaching responsibilities, but it still persists. Individualclasses may run for only a fraction of the allotted time,and any excuse is used to cancel classes completely. Moreonerous and time-consuming chores such as running labsand marking assignments are delegated to demonstra-tors or teaching assistants, often with little or no super-vision.

Little effort is put into course content;syllabuses are rarely revised, andcourse outlines and even entire coursesmay be plagiarized from the Internet.

Little effort is put into course content; syllabusesare rarely revised, and course outlines and even entirecourses may be plagiarized from the Internet.Considerable, sometimes total, duplication of coursematerial may occur across supposedly differentprograms, often taught to the same students at differentlevels. In some cases, higher-level courses are evensimplifications of material covered by moreconscientious colleagues teaching the large lower-levelcourses. Course outlines and manuals submitted forappraisal are often gross exaggerations of what isactually taught.

Avoiding AccountabilityMany staff have little or no conscience about the qual-ity of the students they produce and will do whateverit takes to ensure that poor teaching is not revealed bypoor student performance. The abandonment of teach-ing responsibilities actually benefits students, who aregenerally fixated on grades, as it lightens their courseload. Furthermore, lecturers deliberately prime studentsby addressing only those questions they have set forexams. Former students freely admit that many staff leakreview topics, usually using broad hints or direct in-structions about what material to review. We have evencome across an example where the questions asked oncontinuous assessment tests, review sheets, and the fi-


nal exam were identical and appeared to represent allthat was taught in the course despite an impressive syl-labus. Needless to say, not a single student reported thisinformation: the practice was only discovered by acci-dent.

Exam questions tend toward the prescriptive, partlybecause rote learning is easier for students, but alsobecause simple lists of points are easy to mark. Whenmonitoring exams and marking student work, manylecturers turn a blind eye to cheating and overlookerrors, merely checking off the good points.

Unethical teaching practices not only de-tract from the reputations of academicinstitutions but have serious conse-quences for Botswana’s long-term so-cial and economic future.

ImplicationsUnfortunately, unethical teaching practices not only de-tract from the reputations of academic institutions but haveserious consequences for Botswana’s long-term social andeconomic future. Already the country is overly dependenton a single resource, diamonds (85 percent of foreign earn-ings for 2002) and is ravaged by HIV/AIDS. A failure toproduce well-educated citizens will merely exacerbatethese problems, and it is imperative that training be morethan just a paper exercise.

Recent speeches by the state president suggest thatthe government recognizes that there are problems withtertiary education, in terms of product quality and valuefor money, but it has yet to publicly acknowledge thatissues of staff integrity have, at least in part, contributedto these problems. Sadly, we do not believe these problemsare restricted to Botswana. Many of the worst culprits areexpatriate staff on contracts who are attracted to Botswanaby the regionally high salaries and bring various unethicalpractises with them. However, permanent local staff arebeginning to follow the expatriates’ successes and willthemselves become evaluators of teaching quality here.The cancer is in danger of becoming truly malignant unlesssomething is done about it soon.

Internet Resources

Visit our website for downloadable back issues of International Higher Education and other publications and resources at http://www.bc.edu/cihe/.

Corruption and HigherEducation in GeorgiaNatia JanashiaNatia Janashia is a graduate student in higher education administra-tion, Department of Leadership, Policy and Organization, PeabodyCollege at Vanderbilt University. Address: Vanderbilt University 230Appleton Place, Box 520, Nashville TN 37203, USA. E-mail:[email protected].

The Republic of Georgia, with a population of 5 mil-lion, has roughly 240 higher education institutions.

On the surface, these numbers would suggest a pros-pering, highly educated society. However, behind thisfacade lies the reality of degraded standards, crumblinginfrastructure, rampant academic fraud, and overall de-teriorating educational quality.

At the center of this predicament is pervasivesystemic corruption. Economic, institutional, andorganizational inadequacies have brought about awidespread extralegal system of governance,characterized by few ethical norms or standards. Thepassivity of the Georgian people and their willingnessto accept this as the status quo have further exacerbatedthese deficiencies.

Description of CorruptionCorruption may be defined as an improper use of offi-cial authority for personal or material benefit. Corrup-tion in higher education manifests itself at all levels andaffects a wide array of institutional activities. Major av-enues for corruption include the system of admissions,the professional conduct of teachers and administrators,procurement, and the licensing and accreditation of in-stitutions.

The most corrupt area in the Georgian highereducation system is perhaps admissions. The system isunfair and inefficient, often characterized by bribery andhigh levels of subjective criteria. As a result of biasedoral examinations, even the least-qualified candidatescan easily gain admission to the university system. Someestimates suggest that the majority of available slots areactually sold to prospective students. By some anecdotalreports, the price for university admission may rangeanywhere from $200 to $10,000, depending on theprestige of a university department and a student’squalifications (average monthly salary in Georgia is $50).

Corruption is manifested indirectly through asystem of private tutors who prepare students forentrance examinations. But unlike private tutoring inEurope and North America, in Georgia the fees studentspay are, in fact, bribes passed on through the system toensure admission to the department of their choice.

11

Equally important is having connections and simply“knowing the system.” Even though it is still possibleto gain acceptance into university without paying bribes,chances of success are inversely related to the prestigeof a particular department.

Once admitted, a student can practically buy his orher way through the institution, paying for every examand, ultimately, a diploma. Examinations (either for asemester or for graduation) can cost as much as hundredsof dollars. Moreover, students can bypass the highereducation system altogether by simply buying a diplomafrom an established university. Another venue iscorruption involving educational materials: professorsoften require students to buy their books, and lack ofcompliance may result in failing an exam.

Universities should have public approval andrecognition through accreditation. In Georgia, however,proliferation of private universities and introduction ofnew programs at public institutions have not beenaccompanied by the creation of a fair system ofaccreditation. Licensing new universities and approvingnew programs often require bribes, which means thatthe Ministry of Education may recognize institutions andprograms that do not satisfy minimum quality standards.Consequently, those institutions license individuals whomay not possess adequate professional qualifications.

Corruption is manifested indirectlythrough a system of private tutorswho prepare students for entrance ex-aminations.

Causes and ImplicationsThere are numerous causes of corruption. One reasonmay be the dire economic situation in the country. Forfaculty and administration officials, whose salaries havedeclined significantly over the last decade, taking bribeshas become an alternative source to supplement mea-ger incomes.

In addition, the higher education system suffersfrom the lack of transparent regulation. The decline inpublic expenditures and funding for education hasencouraged universities to seek ways to generateadditional resources. However, the absence of aneffective new law on higher education and the lack ofan efficient regulatory structure have led to increasedlevels of corruption. The lack of an adequate accreditationmechanism, regulated tax system, and publicly availablecomprehensive data on the quality of higher educationinstitutions further compounds the problem.

Another source of corruption is an inadequateorganizational structure, which does not provideincentives for improved performance and does nothave control mechanisms and sanctions in place. Eventhough efforts have been made to restructure andmodernize universities, the system still remains veryauthoritarian and centralized. Such an atmospherefails to create opportunities for professional growthand prevents faculty and the administration fromdeveloping identification and loyalty with theorganization.

Although a number of anticorruptionmeasures have been approved, no sub-stantial changes seem to have takenplace.

Yet some instances of corruption are very hard toexplain just by economic or regulatory difficulties.Corruption in education is a reflection of a generalproblem in post-Soviet Georgian society, where cheatingand bribery are widely accepted practices. During theSoviet era Georgians mastered the art of beating thesystem, and sadly the bad habits do not go away easily.

Although a number of anticorruption measures havebeen approved, no substantial changes seem to havetaken place. Corruption is widely acknowledged byuniversity staff and government officials, but offendingprofessors or administrators are rarely punished. Thereason is that those at the top have a stake in sustainingthe status quo because they are part of the corrupt systemthemselves and greatly benefit from it.

The implications of pervasive corruption are veryserious, and the price of not combating it in a timelymanner may turn out to be very high in Georgia. Highereducation is a linchpin of a country’s economic anddemocratic development. It is through higher educationthat a country educates and chooses its leaders. Whenthe selection is based on a person’s ascriptivecharacteristics and bribery rather than on academicabilities, a country greatly endangers its economic andsocial future. Corruption in higher education may haveeven greater repercussions across Georgian societybecause it encourages and legitimizes corruption in otherspheres. When universities fail to convey to students theimportance of such values as “integrity,” “civil society,”and “civic obligations,” they compromise theirgraduates’ ability to work professionally in their fieldsand contribute to the democratic and social progress oftheir country.


What Can Be Done?There are no simple solutions to combating the problemof educational corruption in Georgia. To start with, it isimportant to engage in an ongoing systematic study ofthe phenomenon and its causes through research; stu-dent, faculty, and administration surveys; and to encour-age public interest and involvement in higher education.Higher education reform should include not only chang-ing systems and regulations but also empowering stu-dents and faculty to take initiatives to combat corruption.

Systemic changes may include reforms in statefinancing of education that encourage private-sectordevelopment and competition among universities;creation of a transparent accreditation system; design ofstandardized national examinations; reform ofregulatory and tax systems and procurement procedures;decentralization of management to individualinstitutions; establishment of professional ethics codesfor university faculty and administrators by encouragingprofessional associations; supporting studentanticorruption movements; and strengthening andempowering student governments.

There are no simple solutions to com-bating the problem of educational cor-ruption in Georgia. To start with, it isimportant to engage in an ongoing sys-tematic study of the phenomenon andits causes through research.

At the institutional level, possible reforms mayinclude redefining institutional missions and draftinghonor codes that place emphasis on quality, academicintegrity, and honesty; improved remuneration thatprovides incentives for better productivity; developingstructures that reward achievement; establishingsanctions against corrupt practices and prosecutingoffenders; developing internal rules and regulations foradministrative practices; redesigning and rationalizingacademic programs and establishing performancetargets. Equally important is the need to develop systemsthat monitor and evaluate progress toward reducedcorruption.

Georgia, in transition to democratization andeconomic development, can no longer afford to wasteits limited resources. Every effort should be made toeliminate corruption in higher education, and it is crucialto ensure that every policy or structural change is aninformed decision based on empirical research andsystematic study.

Graduate Employment: Issuesfor Debate and InquiryJohn BrennanJohn Brennan is professor of higher education research at the OpenUniversity, UK. Address: Centre for Higher Education Research and In-formation, 344-34 Gray’s Inn Road, London WC1X 8BP, UK. E-mail:[email protected].

Recent European studies have shown most graduatesto be in quite reasonable employment situations a

few years after graduating. While concerns continue tobe expressed by some employers that many graduatesdo not possess the right skills and competencies, thereis also considerable industry in many universities to im-prove the employability of their graduates. Does theevidence justify optimism?

Unquestioned AssumptionsGraduates are rewarded (or not) by the actions of em-ployers. We must assume that these are the actions ofrational and fully informed men and women. Thus, wemust also assume that salaries reflect nothing but thebalance between demand and supply. We must furtherassume that employers have perfect information onwhich to set wage levels, to make recruitment decisions,to train or to promote, and that they behave entirely ra-tionally. Much of the analysis of graduate employmentdata explicitly or implicitly rests on assumptions of thissort. Occasionally, sceptical voices are heard.

Averages Are AveragesThe positive image currently associated with graduateemployment prospects should not hide the possibilitythat the rosy futures of the majority may not be sharedby all. A recent U.K. study (Access to What? Analysis ofFactors Determining Graduate Employability, by the Cen-tre for Higher Education Research and Information) at-tempted to identify some of the social and educationalfactors associated with employment success. Overall, thedifferences in terms of social background were not asgreat as might have been expected from previous work.It remains the case, however, that the generally positivepicture on graduate employment may be hiding somequite negative experiences for some graduates.

Perceptions Are PerceptionsMost of our knowledge about skills and competenciescomes from the perceptions of employers and the gradu-ates themselves. While these are certainly interestingdata, they should not go unchallenged. How many em-ployers keep records about the relative success of

E-Learning Special Focus: Economic Issues

13

graduates with different qualifications or back-grounds? And by definition, employers can have noknowledge at all about the employment success ofthe graduates they turned down (or who turned theemployer down by not applying to them in the firstplace). Thus, employers’ perceptions are based onvery imperfect information. Graduates, even more so,lack comparative experiences on which to base theirperceptions.

Recruitment or PerformanceSome of the efforts of higher education institutionsto enhance employability seem to be principally aboutthe first—advice on CV writing, practice interviews,etc. As employers develop ever more sophisticatedrecruitment techniques, higher education institutionsgive ever more support and advice to students on howto present themselves. At their most effective, thesekinds of support are only about helping some stu-dents to succeed over others, helping to ensure thatthey get the “best jobs,” and that the institution’semployment record looks good. Neither the gradu-ate nor his or her employer is necessarily made moreproductive by any of this. A recent study by GeoffMason and Gareth Williams (How Much Does HigherEducation Enhance the Employability of Graduates? 2003,Higher Education Funding Council for England) sug-gested that the impact of employability skills devel-opment may be strongest in the first few months ofgraduates’ careers. This is not to say that there arenot some graduate characteristics—specific or ge-neric—that have long-term value to employers.

How many employers keep recordsabout the relative success of gradu-ates with different qualifications orbackgrounds?

Competence or ConfidenceOne of the things that struck us in the Access to What?project was the belief expressed by many teaching staffthat confidence (and self-esteem, personal identity)might be more important than skills and competenciesin determining both academic and employment success.Especially for the “non-traditional” student, doubts andlack of self-belief could be hampering achievement farmore than any knowledge and skills deficit. And as faras employment was concerned, a lack of confidencecould depress aspirations in the graduate and producenegative reactions in the recruiter.

A Division of LaborVery few graduates (none?) will be fully “formed” pro-fessionally when they leave higher education. The re-cent European study of graduate employment suggestedthat countries differed in the roles played by higher edu-cation and employers in preparing graduates for work.U.K. employers seem to take a much greater share of theresponsibility for education and training than is com-mon elsewhere. This may well be a function of the brev-ity of first degrees in the United Kingdom and the roleplayed by professional bodies in training and certifica-tion. This may also relate to differences in the role playedby formal qualifications in regulating entry to and pas-sage through the labor market.

Very few graduates (none?) will be fully“formed” professionally when theyleave higher education.

The TransitionBuilding on the above, we still know comparatively littleof how graduates achieve their generally positive em-ployment situations after three or four years. We knowthat there are a lot of job changes, further study for many,and periods of unemployment for a significant minor-ity. It might well be that the decisions taken and the ex-periences gained in the three years after graduation areas important for future employment success as the threeyears spent within higher education. Yet we know littleabout them.

The Streetwise GraduateMany supposedly full-time students often combine theirstudies with substantial amounts of term-time work. Thishas implications for the student experience. Althoughthe growth of term-time work has generally had a nega-tive press, many students and staff see potentially posi-tive aspects to the combination of experiences it canafford—such as time-management, teamwork, personalorganization, financial management, and communica-tion skills. Experiences that when taken singly may notadd up to much, may when taken in combination, rep-resent a period of life marked by huge demands andcomplexities and by personal achievements in copingwith it all. But is anyone—in higher education or em-ployment—fully recognizing these achievements? Rolesand identities of student, worker, wife, and mother areheld simultaneously rather than experienced serially. Isthere a lot of learning going on here that we are failingto see and to celebrate?


Knowledge EconomiesNotions of “knowledge economies” and “knowledgesocieties” give added rationale and justification forhigher education expansion and reinforce the focus onemployability questions. But what kinds of knowledgeare really needed in the knowledge economy? We candistinguish between at least five sources of knowledgeof which knowledge represented by educational quali-fications is but one. Others are the nonassessed learningoutcomes from formal education, training in the work-place, work experience, and everyday (life) experience.What “knowledge balance” is required by the demandsof increasing flexibility, change over time, dissonancebetween personal and professional “identities,” both inthe workplace and in “life”? And how does this balancechange over the course of life? One could go on. There is a large issue of how em-ployment-related characteristics of the curriculum com-bine with or are opposed to other elements andpurposes—something about which Harold Silver and Ireached optimistic conclusions about 15 years ago (ALiberal Vocationalism, 1988, Methuen). Would we today?

Affordability, Access, Costing,and the Price of U.S. and U.K.Higher EducationDavid PalfreymanDavid Palfreyman, director, Oxford Centre for Higher Education PolicyStudies, New College, Oxford, OX1 3BN, UK. E-mail:[email protected].

U.S. and U.K. higher education systems have overthe past 20 years faced the steady retreat of the tax-

payer in funding students and institutions. However,while the U.K. system has muddled through by reduc-ing funding per student, U.S. public higher education hasto a great extent compensated for the lost revenue by in-creasing tuition fees payable directly by students and theirfamilies. U.S. private higher education institutions havealso levied ever-higher tuition fees as “the sticker-price,”and have used the enhanced funding to fuel an arms-racefor “prestige” among universities competing over salariesfor the best faculty (so-called “trophy professors”), onmerit-based aid for the cleverest students, and on lavishcampus infrastructure. This process has opened up an in-creasingly wide gap between U.S. private institutions andeven the “flagship” U.S. public institutions, while leavingthe best of U.K. higher education aiming at a moving tar-get in trying to compete as a global player.

Yet, despite these high tuition fees, U.S. highereducation remains affordable for “Middle America,”partly because the U.S. middle class pays rather less intaxes than its equivalent in the United Kingdom—especially given deep discounting of tuition fees and theoffer of student loans to finance the final amount due(in effect, a “price-war” among U.S. institutions overclever entrants). In addition, “Rich America” is not beinggiven as much of a wasteful public subsidy as is currentlybestowed on “Rich England.” These high tuition fees,regardless of the high levels of financial aid, may deteraccess for “Poor America” to the very best private U.S.institutions (and to a lesser extent the best of the publicinstitutions), compared with the accessibility of the eliteU.K. higher education institutions.

Hence, if U.K. institutions were completelyderegulated with respect to the capping of tuition feesor chose to exercise their theoretical autonomy and takefull control of their destiny, it would be politically wiseto have robust policies in place in advance that wouldensure at least the same level of accessibility as at present.Oxford, for example, must also be able to demonstratethe financial viability of such access and student financialaid policies, funded (presumably) partly by chargingmuch higher annual tuition fees (£15K) to “Rich England”and rather higher fees (£10K) to “Middle England”(taking into account affordability issues), while, ofcourse, charging very little (if anything at all, in order tomaintain access) to “Poor England.”

Yet, despite these high tuition fees, U.S.higher education remains affordable for“Middle America.”

That said, it will be interesting to see if Oxford (andothers) can make the “high fee/high aid” numbers work,given that, as already noted, it may have a larger “poor”group to finance than do its overall wealthier U.S.counterparts. In its favor, it is probably “leaner & meaner”in productivity terms than the average U.S. Ivy Leagueschool, although the contribution toward such economythat comes from keeping faculty salaries internationallylow is a false economy in the medium term as Oxfordincreasingly fails to attract for its academic jobs the fullrange of good applicants and even then does not alwaysmanage to recruit its first-choice candidates.

The salutary question posed by a hostile politicalenvironment for the Oxford dons currently “on watch”is whether the potential for accelerated decline relativeto the U.S. global players (with their fiercely defended

15

autonomy and robust lobbying of government) is nowso great and the “control freak” meddling of governmentis so likely to be at best useless and at worst damagingthat the dons must take radical action for fear ofotherwise themselves going down in history as the oneswho steered the noble “SS Oxford” onto the rocks, ratherthan as just another generation of the university’sleadership that “merely” allowed the unfortunate vesselto drift deeper into the doldrums.

It will be interesting to see if Oxford (andothers) can make the “high fee/highaid” numbers work.

The 2003 White PaperThere is certainly a need in the United Kingdom to bet-ter understand U.S. higher education in the context ofthe highly politicized debate here about the size, shape,and funding of the system as recently fuelled by thegovernment’s “white paper” on The future of Higher Edu-cation (www.dfes.gov.uk/highereducation). The whitepaper addresses enhancing the funding of higher edu-cation and institutions to allow them “to compete withthe world’s best” and to avoid the “serious risk of de-cline” after “decades of under-investment.” Notably, asU.K. higher education by OECD norms rather belatedlymassified, “funding per student fell by 36 per cent be-tween 1989 and 1997.”

The white paper also raises the subject of ensuringthe affordability for “Middle England” of the proposedincrease of the current flat-rate £1100 (U.S.$1,750) annualtuition fee to one capped at £3000 (U.S.$4,500) from 2006by “abolishing up-front tuition fees for all students” andwith their repayment after graduation through the taxsystem then being “linked to ability to pay.” Alsoproposed is extending the availability of highereducation to the “talented and best from allbackgrounds” and improving its accessibility for “lessadvantaged families.”

The July 2003 report of the all-party Education andSkills Committee on “The Future of Higher Education”reviews the white paper and calls for a maximum annualtuition fee of £5000 (as also advocated by the “top”institutions) rather than £3000 so as to ensure a truemarket in the provision of higher education(www.parliament.uk/parliamentary-committees/education-and-skills-committee.cfm). The reportexpresses fears that “too great a reliance on fundingthrough taxation will inevitably lead to greaterGovernment control of the sector and less independencefor universities,” assesses the proposed “Access

Regulator” as “unnecessary,” brands the present studentfinancial aid system as “complex and confusing,” andcomments that academic salaries are “woefully low,” andrefers to the sorry state of U.K. higher education as “thelast of the nationalized industries.”

The government has quickly brushed off thecarefully researched report and is sticking with its ratherless evidence-based white paper, which seems sadly toachieve the worst of all worlds by maximizing oppositionand yet at the same time watering down the degree ofproposed deregulation to such an extent that, if approvedby Parliament, the new £3000 fee (allowed to increaseby only inflation until 2011 or so) will be of no real valuein enabling U.K. higher education “to compete with theworld’s best.”

Just as the United Kingdom’s “New Labour”government in its 2003 consultation document sets out“the need for reform” in terms of shifting the cost ofhigher education more toward students and theirfamilies, so there has been debate in the United Statesover the cost/accountability and affordability/accessibility of higher education since Congress in 1997expressed the frustration of “Middle America” with theever-increasing “cost of college” by establishing theNational Commission on the Cost of Higher Education.Yet, despite the middle-class angst, an observer of thehigher education scene across the OECD countries mightindeed be tempted to predict a slow but steadyconvergence toward the U.S. norm of requiring anincreasingly significant student/family contribution forthe cost of delivering higher education.

Despite the middle-class angst, an ob-server of the higher education sceneacross the OECD countries might indeedbe tempted to predict a slow but steadyconvergence toward the U.S. norm ofrequiring an increasingly significant stu-dent/family contribution for the cost ofdelivering higher education.

A Moving Target?The £3K per annum fee from 2006 proposed in the whitepaper would take the current £3300 figure over the stan-dard three-year undergraduate degree course (which ispaid in full by only some 40 percent of U.K. students) to£9K (ca.$14K) compared with, by then, for the four-yearbaccalaureate ca.$20/25K at U.S. public institutions, andperhaps $30K-plus at the research-oriented flagship cam-pus within each state higher education system. Thus, the


white paper is indeed aiming at a moving target in tryingto keep the upper end of U.K. higher education institu-tions competitive in income terms with even the best ofthe U.S. publics, let alone the top private institutions, whereannual fees are already nearing $30K. And, indeed, thereis also a trend toward the semiprivatization of state flag-ship campus institutions (now being called “the publicIvies”), which may push fees yet higher than the ca.$7Kper annum referred to above.

If U.K. and U.S. higher education systems continue todiverge on funding, they will then share certain features.The politics of affordability of higher education for “MiddleAmerica” during the 1990s trumped the politics of accessto higher education for “Poor America,” which is notsurprising given the relative voting power of the twoconstituencies. This scenario potentially will be echoed inthe United Kingdom, where in response to New Labour’swhite paper and its proposed £3K per annum tuition feefor “Middle England” the Conservative Party has focusedon affordability, asserting that it would avoid the need toincrease fees (or even levying them at all) by reducing thesize of the higher education system and hence itsaccessibility to “Poor England” as a means of savingmoney.

The full version of this paper can be down-loaded from theOxCHEPS web-site at oxcheps.new.ox.ac.uk, “OccasionalPapers.”

Lessons of Experience: ReformInitiatives in AfricanUniversitiesDamtew TeferraDamtew Teferra is assistant research professor and editor-in-chief of thenewly launched Journal of Higher Education in Africa at the Center forInternational Higher Education, Campion Hall, Boston College, USA. E-mail: [email protected].

The growing interest in revitalizing African universi-ties has prompted the hosting of numerous regional

and international conferences. The joint conference inAccra, Ghana, in September 2003—hosted by the As-sociation of African Universities (AAU), the Associa-tion for the Development of Education inAfrica—Working Group on Higher Education(ADEA-WGHE), the National Council for TertiaryEducation, Ghana (NCTE), and the World Bank—wasa major event that attracted numerous higher educa-tion leaders, managers, researchers, think tanks,NGOs, and funders.

Things That WorkOrganized under the theme of—Improving Tertiary Edu-cation in Sub-Saharan Africa—Things that Work, the con-ference focused on things that work instead of dwellingon crisis talk that usually dominates such meetings. Fora change, the stories we read and heard departed fromthe conventional tone. At times this departure felt some-what radical. The education minister of Ghana, Eliza-beth Ohene, challenged participants to consider therunning of universities by business leaders. The subduedjeers that followed her remark underscore the seriouschallenges that underlie instituting changes in highereducation institutions.

Without a doubt, such forums catalyzehigher education dialogues that subse-quently strengthen research in the field.

What was in many ways comforting at theconvention is the reaffirmation of commitment by theWorld Bank to revitalize the continent’s highereducation systems. Noting that the “Bank does not havea very strong credibility around higher education,”Birger Fredriksen, the Bank’s representative, reassuredparticipants that the Bank “would like to stronglysupport higher education in Africa.”

The AAU’s executive secretary, Akilagpa Sawyerr,in recognition of the Bank’s renewed interest, stated thatthe “external community rediscovered higher educationin the development of the continent” and added thatthe Bank” has come around to recognize highereducation.” He reckoned that “the new direction by theBank will change the attitude of governments in Africa.”

Even though the World Bank has often been anobject of much criticism surrounding higher educationdevelopment in Africa, this was not the case at this event.This may be attributed to the awareness of the Bank’srenewed commitment or, as someone put it,“ self-restraint on the part of participants not to bite thefeeding hand” that organized the conference.

A great many ideas were traded on innovations andreforms that have taken place in institutions andcountries. Without a doubt, such forums catalyze highereducation dialogues that subsequently strengthenresearch in the field, and they thus need to be organizedregularly both for practitioners as well as researchers.

Many speakers presented their reform initiativesin a positive light with a cursory mention of thechallenges they faced in instituting them. A completeanalysis would entail digging deeper to capture the

E-Learning Special Focus: Africa

17

whole story of the reform efforts, their significance, andtheir impact. While one would not expect the presentersto scrutinize and criticize their own initiatives andinstitutions in public, one cannot help but remain curiousto read the whole story of the reform campaigns.

Things That May Not WorkThe conference covered a wide array of higher educationissues that included funding, HIV/AIDS, management,gender, regional cooperation, and brain drain. In somecases, however, opinions were expressed that are eithersimply unworkable or off-the-mark, and if leftunchecked, may have significant ramifications.

One stunning case was a suggestion to restrictmovements of highly trained personnel to curtail braindrain (ironically made by someone who would not returnto his home country). While a country may have a vestedinterest and may place moral and legal imperatives onits citizens, such measures are tantamount to violatingtheir human rights. Such an approach is simply not insync with events of the 21st century dictated by theregimes of internationalization and globalization.Furthermore, as cost sharing for higher education isgathering momentum, these legal and moral imperativesare being eroded, further complicating the issue of braindrain.

The point here is that the issues that confront us areneither simple nor straightforward and therefore call forin-depth understanding and critical analysis. While wecontemplate things that work, we have to remainconstantly vigilant concerning things that may not work.The renewed major initiatives need to be carefullyharnessed and wisely directed—buttressed by seriousand sustained research—to avoid past shortcomings.

One stunning case was a suggestion torestrict movements of highly trainedpersonnel to curtail brain drain.

Nurturing Indigenous KnowledgeOften, change is not greeted warmly as the unknown chal-lenges our imagination and besieges our comfort zone. Aswe grapple with instituting changes, there is a tremendousneed to identify the maze of idiosyncrasies that are uniqueto individual countries, universities, institutions, and evendepartments. As the presentations indicated, some par-ticipants advocated a quick reform process while othersadvanced a gradual approach. In other cases, some advo-cated having a few champions of change and a top-downapproach, while others supported a grassroots approach.

Exploring and developing these detailedprescriptions will entail that the community of highereducation leaders engage not only champions of reform,as is often advocated, but also critics and skeptics. Thenotion that “who cares about skeptics when we are shortof allies” would undermine elements of a “reality check.”

It is commendable to raise the aware-ness of higher education leaders as partof the effort to revitalize African institu-tions as this closely fits with the ongo-ing endeavors in higher educationresearch and publishing.

It is commendable to raise the awareness of highereducation leaders as part of the effort to revitalizeAfrican institutions as this closely fits with the ongoingendeavors in higher education research and publishing.It should be cautioned, however, that simply raising thecaliber of the existing leadership is far from sufficient.The training and nurturing of a new breed of highereducation managers and administrators should bevigorously pursued. As the issues that confront highereducation grow in complexity and magnitude,institutions need to be equipped with qualifiedpersonnel who are up to the challenge. This requiresthe establishment and revitalization of new programson the continent that provide high-level training inhigher education administration and management.

Advocating ConsortiaCreating and maintaining good partnerships, eventhough not that easy, are commendable steps. The part-nership between the regional and external organizationsto organize the conference is praiseworthy. It is impor-tant for such interactions to continue in a more sustain-able and equitable manner to play a positive role not onlyin revitalizing higher education systems but also build-ing viable regional think tanks and institutions.

Sustained support of major external agencies fostersthe development and influence of regional institutions.Regional institutions, such as the AAU, therefore, needto engage external agencies constructively in their effortto build a better higher education system.

The recommendations to create a consortium ofuniversities and act through the AAU to negotiate abetter Internet deal indicate aspirations for strongregional organization that could play a prominent role.There are pressing reasons to do that. Internet access,which costs under U.S.$20 in the United States, costs as


much as U.S.$20,000 in Africa. Regional institutionssuch as the AAU need to lobby vigorously on behalfof higher education institutions by exerting pressureon governments—for instance, by demandingpreferential treatment for educational and researchinstitutions. In Senegal, for instance,telecommunications services for educationalinstitutions cost half the regular price due largely tolobbying. The consortium initiative could beeffectively extended to other activities such asacquisitions of subscriptions, books, on-linedatabases, and lab equipment.

Institutional Memory: Pushing the Knowledge FrontiersIt is very encouraging that conferences on higher edu-cation in Africa are now commonplace. What shouldbe religiously fostered, however, is the tracking andpublication of conference papers promptly and en-suring their wide distribution. We need to capture anddisseminate “institutional memory,” not simply toaddress the challenge of “reinventing the wheel,” butto push the frontiers of our knowledge of thecontinent’s higher education system.

Selected materials from this conference will bepublished in the newly established journal, Journal ofHigher Education in Africa. Hopefully, the participantsand conference organizers will disseminate thelessons that were learned at the conference and allowthe ideas to percolate up and down the line ofadministrative and management command in therespective countries and institutions.

Caveat EmptorChange is a tricky matter, and its success or lackthereof is a complex handiwork of historical, social,economical, cultural, psychological, institutional,personal, and technical variables. Simply put, thereis no one universal formula to effect change and in-novation. While we strive to learn from things thatworked, we also have to draw experience from thingsthat simply failed although, we recognize that suc-cess and failure are not fully contagious.

As the Bank and other funding institutionsreaffirm their commitment to higher educationdevelopment after many years of neglect,expectations appear to be running high in Africa. Itis, however, prudent to exercise caution in the face ofthis gathering euphoria in case the outcome does notlive up to expectations. None of the stakeholders canafford a backlash for the second time round that mayhave severe consequences on the development ofhigher education on the continent.

The African Virtual University—Developments and CritiqueMoses O. OketchMoses O. Oketch is research assistant professor of public policy andeducation, Vanderbilt University, 230 Appleton Place, Nashville, TN37203, USA. E-mail: [email protected].

Initiatives supported by information and communica-tions technologies (ICTs) form an increasingly impor-

tant component of donor-funded development projects.One such project is the African Virtual University(AVU), established by the World Bank in 1997. AVU’smission is to bridge the digital divide and knowledgegap between Africa and the rest of the world by dra-matically increasing access to “global” educationalresources throughout Africa. AVU reports indicatethat over 27,000 African students and professionalshave participated in its semester-long courses andexecutive business seminars since its inception in1997. A total of 31 learning centers have been estab-lished in 17 African nations and over 3,000 hours ofcourses and seminars delivered, obtained from lead-ing universities such as the Massachusetts Instituteof Technology (MIT) in the United States and CurtinUniversity in Australia. In fact, there is no doubt thatICT-based distance education seems a reasonable ap-proach to complementing domestic capacity in Afri-can institutions in programs such as engineering,science, and management.

A total of 31 learning centers have beenestablished in 17 African nations andover 3,000 hours of courses and semi-nars delivered.

Unclear Long-Term BenefitsIn spite of the impressive numbers and the prestigeattached to overseas universities, in retrospect, theWorld Bank and others involved in the planning ofthe AVU seem not to have recognized the contextualcomplexity of establishing a virtual university in Af-rica. Even more important is whether Africa is readyand in need of such a university. Consequently, AVU’slong-term educational and socioeconomic potentialhas become unclear. Equally unclear is the intergov-ernmental policy framework under which the AVUshould operate and even more so whether it can beregulated at all. It is not evident that those involvedin the planning of AVU knew how best to use tech-

19

nology to expand access to tertiary education in 1997,nor indeed today, because the project seems to be anoverly ambitious one that is approaching its demise.

At its inception, AVU appeared to be a timely projectfor a region of the world that is known more for itsbountiful natural resources and large labor pools and isoften described by development partners as a land rich inpotential but whose population lacks adequate educationand training. Considering that only 3.8 percent of Africa’scollege-age group gets absorbed into tertiary education,AVU seemed to be a panacea to meeting the demand forhigher education. However, going into its sixth year, AVUhas scaled back on its original plan of becoming a fullyfledged international virtual university. Instead, it is nowan institution that operates conspicuously as anongovernmental organization. There is even concern thatAVU is slowly sliding onto the shelves of IT transferprojects in developing countries that have resulted inscanty success, or a frustrating case of a transfer that hasfailed to fulfill its initial promise. Critics have argued thatAVU is no different from other World Bank educationprojects that may only realize minimal success when theyare considered successful, but often yielding no benefitsto the people the projects were intended to help. Othersdismiss AVU as being useless in solving Africa’s educationproblems and ill-conceived to expand access. Still, thereare those who contend that AVU is unique, ambitious, andthat it has shown a great deal of success, and only requiressome adjustment. Among them are AVU centercoordinators who have praised it as a means of “feedinghungry minds in Africa” and offering the best way forwardto integrating technology in Africa’s higher education. Tobe sure, both polarized groups have a point. For the critics,the issues are potent: did African countries buy into AVUblindly without considering the likely long-term benefits?Could it be possible that the funds used in establishingAVU would be better utilized to revitalize the familiar butdeteriorating conditions at the state universities? Or, is AVUthe roadmap that will launch Africa’s higher educationinto the information and technology world? The vastliterature suggests that AVU is already a frustrated projectbeing pushed to the periphery. One piece of evidence insupport this view is the absence of its mention in many ofthe development plans and economic survey reports ofthe countries involved, such as Kenya.

Accreditation and Other IssuesThe issue of accreditation is important. It has been im-portant in the dissemination of distance education inthe U.S. higher education system. Since a lot of peoplein Africa have degrees from European, American, or evenAustralian universities, giving a degree from a univer-sity in an OECD country may be acceptable. It is of course

essential that education given to Africans be relevant tothe needs of their countries and circumstances, and lo-cal accreditation can be a means of ensuring this is thecase. It is possible that bad national universities may tryto stay in business by enforcing their monopoly on edu-cation and by denying accreditation to internationalOpen University alternative institutions that are verygood. Such multinational virtual universities may fill animportant niche. But there is also reason to doubt thatthe niche is in teaching freshman science courses (as in-tended by the AVU curriculum). True, there are a lot ofspecialties in science, engineering, and management thatare needed in Africa but for which most African coun-tries lack sufficient student demand to provide good,affordable training. There seem to be several alternatives:not to provide the training; spend too much and pro-vide training nationally to classes that are too small; sendstudents abroad, who may never return; or use multina-tional, distance education. The last seems potentially abetter solution, but not in the current AVU design. Evenculturally, AVU has failed to “fit in.” While having stu-dents sit in a room with an African teaching assistant tolisten to a canned or broadcast lecture overcomes somecultural problems such as accent, it seems inconvenientand expensive arrangement for students.

Critics have argued that AVU is no dif-ferent from other World Bank educa-tion projects that may only realizeminimal success when they are consid-ered successful, but often yielding nobenefits to the people the projects wereintended to help.

While AVU was established to improve access in thefields of science, engineering, and business, the morecritical question is whether a significant number of youngAfricans yearning for tertiary education could beeducated, or better educated, or more affordablyeducated by the AVU than without it. Can the AVU walka path of balancing high-quality programs andaffordability? In the long run, it is education that counts,not the use of ICT. It is worrisome that Africans may becaptured by the glamor of the technology, withoutknowing whether any technology offers a cost-effectivealternative to avoid current educational problems.Africans should have access to the most cost-effectivetechnology for specific educational purposes. In itspresent form, AVU is not well suited to meet its outlinedobjectives.


Whither Private HigherEducation in Africa?Mahlubi MabizelaMahlubi (Chief) Mabizela, PROPHE collaborating scholar, is a researchspecialist at South Africa’s Human Sciences Research Council. Address:Private Bag X 41, Pretoria, 0001, South Africa. E-mail:[email protected].

IHE devotes a column in each issue to a contribution from PROPHE, theProgram for Research on Private Higher Education, headquartered atthe University at Albany. See http://www.albany.edu/~prophe.

The United States International University in Kenyaconvened the first private higher education confer-

ence in Africa in early September 2003. The majority ofapproximately 90 delegates were senior personnel of pri-vate higher education institutions from about 10 Afri-can states, but participants also included representativesof supranational organizations, governments, diplomaticmissions, academics, and researchers. They deliberatedon the theme: “Meeting the Challenges of Higher Edu-cation in Africa: The Role of Private Universities,” andthey shared experiences and ways of setting up net-works. This article highlights the conference’s key topi-cal issues.

The Context of Private Higher Education GrowthMost private institutions in Africa were established dur-ing the 1990s, in a relatively new higher education envi-ronment that is undergoing major developments. As inmany developing countries, the demand for higher edu-cation beyond what public institutions provide is largelyresponsible for the growth. Additionally, some church-related private institutions provide alternatives to thegeneral public institutions. And in some African coun-tries private institutions have emerged due to deterio-ration (sometimes near collapse) of their public sectors,which are suffering from a severe lack of resources, fund-ing shortfalls due to inflation and population increases(not commensurate to the successful primary and sec-ondary education), as well as social disturbances suchas wars, gangsterism, and cultism. Such a collapse, inturn, strains private institutions because they are re-garded as safer zones of learning. South Africa is an ex-ception to these trends as its leading public universitiesretain high quality and as profit making and“credentialism” largely drive its private higher educa-tion growth, a common feature in developed countriesworldwide.

Proponents of private provision of higher educationclaim institutional and program diversity. Consideringeducation as a “public good,” however, many

governments formulate policies that tightly regulateprivate institutions. In Ghana, for example, privateuniversity colleges must affiliate with public universitiesacademically, but remain autonomous administratively.While this arrangement is said to aim at quality assuranceof the affiliate institutions, the potential forisomorphism—the convergence of identities of differentinstitutions—is high and might stifle the developmentof private institutions. An approach finding generalapproval in Kenya gives a commission for highereducation overall responsibility for licensing privatehigher education institutions. In other African states,such as Zimbabwe, private institutions operate on parwith their public counterparts. State policies, therefore,are central to the growth of private higher educationinstitutions and affect them in different ways.

Proponents of private provision ofhigher education claim institutional andprogramme diversity.

Key ChallengesEven when Africa’s private institutions absorb excess de-mand (however incompletely in some countries), expandaccess, and provide institutional diversity, they still haveto convince stakeholders that they can be relied upon tooffer quality education. Inadequate facilities (including li-braries and modern technology) and under-qualified per-sonnel hamper their efforts. Moreover, most African highereducation systems are losing quality academics throughretirement, emigration to developed countries, and migra-tion to private enterprise. Even more troubling is their in-ability to replenish such losses. Moreover, experiencedacademics are underutilized, especially with regard to nur-turing young academics. The lack of staff developmentstrategies ensures continued reliance on public institutionsfor trained staff. This is self-crippling to the sustainabilityof quality, a problem private institutions are acutely awareof because some of their personnel are retired professorsfrom public institutions. Some critics, however, regard theemployment of retired professors as an indictment of qual-ity. There is no evidence, though, that this lowers stan-dards, and actually the opposite is true. Such criticismsoften stem from fear of change and competition on thepart of mainstream institutions. Indeed, improvement ofquality education and services can make private highereducation institutions better alternatives to public institu-tions.

Whether or not many private institutions willattract top students, a pressing challenge is to

21

exchange traditional curriculum development for newand innovative models. If they are to provide realprogram differentiation, private institutions need todetermine social needs and develop curriculaaccordingly. Such curricula should then withstand theproof of quality maintenance and assurance whilecontinuing to adapt to local needs and labor marketdemands. Broadly, private institutions in Africa seek tostrive for international competitiveness with curriculathat take cognizance of universal graduate standards.In the midst of these challenges, some institutionsgrapple with requirements of their owners, who ofteninterfere with governance, recruitment of personnel, andacademic progress.

A political problem for many private institutions, aspreviously experienced in Latin America and EasternEurope, is their tendency to specialize in inexpensivefields of study that are in high demand. Natural andphysical sciences, engineering, and technology remainlargely peripheral, however much they are core tonational development. Private higher education faces thechallenge of offering diverse disciplines if it wants thestatus of universities of repute.

A political problem for many privateinstitutions is their tendency to special-ize in inexpensive fields of study thatare in high demand.

ConclusionMany challenges facing Africa’s private higher educa-tion institutions also confront its public institutions,though often in different ways and magnitudes. Africanprivate higher education primarily plays a supportiverole to public-sector institutions. If this role is vital, thenpublic policy issues arise over governments lending asupportive hand, trying to shape growth toward mean-ingful social development. Issues also arise over howboth public and private institutions might together ad-dress challenges in their systems. Similarly, issues emergeover how best to pursue human resources development,with what mix of competition and cooperation betweenthe two higher education sectors. To approach suchmatters intelligently, public higher education institu-tions, the citizenry, and governments need to take noteof the patterns of development, achievements, andlimitations of the region’s private higher education in-stitutions. Perhaps these and other issues will be fruit-fully addressed in the next regionwide conference onprivate higher education that South Africa is preparingto host.

Foreign Higher EducationActivity in China Richard GarrettRichard Garrett is deputy director, Observatory on Borderless HigherEducation. Address: Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, 36Gordon Square, London WC1H 0PF, UK. E-mail: [email protected].

C hina is perhaps the world’s most complex,overhyped, and underanalyzed market for

transnational higher education. The country’s size, com-bined with China’s transition from a command to apseudomarket economy and potential as a superpower,has prompted many higher education institutions in thedeveloped world to explore the possibilities for marketentry. The recent accession of China to the World TradeOrganization and the increasingly favorable official viewtaken of in-country activity by foreign education insti-tutions (new regulations came into force in September2003), suggest a genuine opening up of the market. Thisarticle is based on two reports recently published by theObservatory on Borderless Higher Education(www.obhe.ac.uk).

From the Chinese perspective, the major benefits offoreign involvement are capacity, status, and innovation.China is rapidly becoming the most significant sourceof students studying abroad (sending over 63,000students to the United States alone in 2002). However,like some other major source countries such as Malaysiaand Singapore, China may come to view foreign-sourced,in-country provision as more cost-effective, in terms ofreducing travel costs and stemming brain drain.

Regulation of Foreign ActivityThe third and most recent piece of legislation ontransnational provision was released in March 2003 andoffers clarification on the prior 1995 regulations. (Boththe 1995 and 2003 regulations are available in Englishon the Ministry of Education website.) Major featuresinclude the stipulation that foreign institutions mustpartner with Chinese institutions; partnerships must notseek profit as their objective; no less than half the mem-bers of the governing body of the institution must beChinese citizens and the post of president or the equiva-lent must be a Chinese citizen residing in China; the ba-sic language of instruction should be Chinese; and tuitionfees may not be raised without approval.

The sustained proscription of foreign educationinstitutions making a profit in China is in contrast to the2002 law on domestic private higher education, whichpermits a “reasonable return.” It would appear that noChinese private higher education institution has yet wonapproval to offer programs leading to foreign degrees,

E-Learning Countries and Regions


so the combination of a for-profit domestic provider anda foreign provider has yet to materialize, at least at degreelevel. Indeed, I am not aware of any foreign for-profithigher education institution currently operatingindependently in China at the bachelor’s degree levelor above. Known examples of other foreign for-profiteducation activity include IT education firms such asIndia’s NITT and brokers such as CIBT. Canadian CIBTacts as a local partner for some U.S. for-profit institutions,such as Western International University (owned by theApollo Group) and ITT Educational Services.

The sustained proscription of foreigneducation institutions making a profit inChina is in contrast to the 2002 law ondomestic private higher education,which permits a “reasonable return.”

None of the regulations on foreign education activitymention on-line learning or distance learning of anykind. According to the first report, there are no officiallyapproved examples of Sino-foreign on-line provision,suggesting that approval would be required (the fullreports contain some recent examples). While on-lineprovision is not directly mentioned in the regulation ofSino-foreign partnerships, any such activity wouldconstitute offering foreign provision in China and wouldthus appear to fall under the scope of the decree.

Scale of foreign activityAdequate data are not available on the scale of foreignhigher education activity in China, but the evidence sug-gests rapid development. According to the 2003 decreeconcerning foreign education activity in China, there arecurrently 712 “approved” jointly run educational insti-tutions in China. Jointly-run education institutions en-compass activities ranging from codeveloped newinstitutions, to a foreign degree franchised to an exist-ing Chinese university, and much subdegree andnondegree provision. The decree states that the UnitedStates is the source of the highest number of partner-ships, followed by Australia, Canada, Japan, Singapore,the United Kingdom, France, and Germany.

China’s size, devolved authority, and ambivalentpractice of the rule of law have led to a situation of bothofficially approved and nonapproved foreign provision,and various types of approval. The national Ministry ofEducation regularly publishes a list of “approved highereducation joint programs in China leading to the awardof overseas degrees or degrees of the Hong Kong Special

Administrative Region (SAR).” In 2002, this listcontained 67 partnerships covering 72 joint programs,roughly a tenth of the 712 total mentioned above.

The report states that in 2002, aside from these 72approved joint programs, the “remainder . . . are onlyauthorized to offer certificates and diplomas.” Other datasuggest that there are in fact many nonapproved jointprograms in China leading to the award of a foreigndegree. Very few countries collect or publish detaileddata on the offshore activities of their universities. Themain exception is Australia. Data published by theAustralian Vice-Chancellor’s Committee (AVCC) in May2003 list 200 current offshore programs in Chinaundertaken by Australian universities, 157 (79 percent)of which involve either Australian bachelor’s or master’sprograms. If one assumes that the United States, theUnited Kingdom, and other major source countries arealso offering nonapproved degree provision on a similarscale, it is clear that the real extent of foreign degreeactivity is far in excess of that reported on the officialministry list. Given the apparent scale of nonapprovedactivity, the variety of sources of nonministry approval(e.g., municipal, provincial, and local governments) andthe possibility that some programs lack any form ofgovernment approval at all, the figure may be only anapproximation of a phenomenon beyond the scope ofofficial statistics.

It is clear that the real extent of foreigndegree activity is far in excess of thatreported on the official ministry list.

The data show that 27 Australian universitieshave current offshore programs in China (excludingHong Kong SAR). This represents 71 percent of theAVCC’s 38 university members, suggesting China asa major site of offshore activity for a large majority ofAustralia’s universities. Offshore programs in Chinarepresent 13 percent of all reported current offshoreactivity by AVCC members. Fifty-three percent ofAustralian joint programs in China are offered by just3 universities—Charles Stuart, Southern Queensland,and Victoria. By level, 50 percent of programs are atthe master’s level, 29 percent at the bachelor’s level,with the remainder a mixture of postgraduate andundergraduate certificates, diplomas, foundationcourses, and English-language provision. By subject,approximately 60 percent of provision is in the broadarea of business and management, with IT, law, andeducation the other prominent disciplines.

23

The AVCC data also include valuable informationon mode of delivery. For example, the data show thatless than 17 percent of Australian offshore programs inChina included a period of study in Australia. Just over25 percent include at least some study by distancelearning, while only 15 percent are offered wholly at adistance. The AVCC data give no details on enrollments.

In the second Observatory report, 20 Sino-foreigneducation partnerships were selected for analysis,covering nine countries and six categories of activity. Aswould be expected, almost all activity began followingthe 1995 regulations, and there is evidence over time ofmore ambition and greater commitment on the part ofjoint ventures—moving from joint centers and programsto branch campuses. Both the University of Nottinghamin the United Kingdom and Oklahoma City Universityfrom the United States were expressly invited by thenational authorities to set up operations in China,marking the first official push in this direction.

ConclusionTo conclude, while few importer countries publish de-tailed information on the activities of their higher edu-cation institutions, evidence from Australia indicates thatthe total number of ventures involving degree programsfrom foreign institutions greatly exceeds the numberreported on the official ministry list. There are clear am-biguities over approved and nonapproved status, withapproval operating at various “official” levels. The rangeof known partnerships suggests a flexible relationshipbetween government regulation and local practice. Whatis indisputable is that transnational activity in China hasexpanded rapidly in scale in recent years, the extent offoreign commitment is growing, and the types of pro-viders involved are becoming increasingly diverse.

It is clear based on the AVCC data that whiletraditional offshore markets such as Hong Kong,Malaysia, and Singapore continue to host the majorityof franchise activity, China is increasingly significant and,given its size, has the potential to dwarf all others. Keyquestions for the future include: how the roles of Chineseregulation, enforcement, and local practice will develop;the extent to which official statistics and practice will bealigned; and whether exporter nations will followAustralia’s lead and collect better data on the activitiesof their institutions (not least in the interests of qualityassurance). Finally, and related to the last point, as Chinabecomes an increasingly significant site for highereducation delivery from all over the world (perhaps themost significant site within a decade) and as deliveryinvolves a ever more complex mix of public and privatepartners, what might be a legitimate (and feasible) rolefor national quality agencies in overseeing activity?

Higher Education Reform inthe Balkans: Using theBologna ProcessAnthony W. MorganAnthony Morgan is professor of educational leadership and policy andspecial assistant to the president at the University of Utah. Address:Dept. of Educ. Leaadership, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112,USA. Email: [email protected].

Like many other regions in transition, countries in theBalkans are struggling with higher education reform

due at least in part to academic cultural traditions andorganizational structures. Change comes hard here de-spite very difficult financial circumstances that some-times provide opportunities for reform. Butgovernmental and institutional aspirations for changeseem to find common ground in the Bologna process.This article focuses on the development of this commonground in one Balkan nation—Macedonia (a September2003 signatory to Bologna)—and places it in the broadercontext of the Balkans. The basis of these observations isthe author’s work on both OECD and World Bankprojects in Macedonia in spring and early summer 2003.The views expressed here are solely those of the author.

Macedonia, one of six former republics of Yugoslavia,has only two public universities—with Sts. Cyril andMethodius University in the capitol of Skopje (SU); thelarger and more prestigious of the two. SU has 24 of thecountry’s 30 faculties, the remaining 6 are found at St.Kliment Ohridski University, with its principal campus inBitola. Their combined enrollment in 2002 was 44,710—which represents a 64 percent increase since 1994. Privateuniversities were only authorized in 2000 but are nowgrowing rapidly. Like most Balkan countries, Macedoniahas a unitary system where non-university-level facultiesare part of the universities.

Macedonia, like many transition economy countries,is under pressure from the IMF and World Bank to reducethe relatively high proportion of GDP in its governmentsector. Public-sector budgets are thus under enormouspressure, and the universities find themselves squeezedbetween these constraints and burgeoning enrollmentpressure. One result is that the dual tuition system underwhich some students are admitted on the basis of statequotas and others pay relatively high tuition rates isbreaking down as all students are beginning to pay tuition.

Highly Autonomous FacultiesOne of the organizational characteristics in Macedonia thatis typical of most Balkan countries is highly autonomousfaculties. Individual faculties have separate legal status,


present their own budgets to the government, and re-ceive appropriations directly to the faculty level. Theposition of rector, traditionally weak in comparison toWestern models, is especially weak in Macedonia. OtherBalkan countries have struggled with this same struc-tural characteristic, but significant changes to strengthenthe role of rectors have been implemented in Sloveniaand Croatia. Slovenia’s adopted reform centralizes sub-stantial powers under the rector, while Croatia’s modelis characterized by more limited functional integrationof responsibility at the rector ’s level. Bosnia andHerzegovina and Kosovo have had organizational re-forms imposed, while Serbia is struggling with its ownsolution.

The highly decentralized nature of Macedonianuniversities, combined with the instability of coalitiongovernments and high turnover of ministers of education,have posed serious obstacles to reform. Granted somefaculties have moved ahead in very progressive andaggressive ways in the absence of any central policydirections, but such reform is very uneven and has notaddressed cross-faculty issues. There is currently a legalreform process in place that would start with the morelimited functional integration of the Croatian model andslowly move toward the stronger Slovenian model.

The current government in Macedoniahas strongly endorsed the Bologna pro-cess and its minister of education andscience, Azis Pollozhani, is proving to bean effective leader of reform.

The Bologna ProcessThe current government in Macedonia has strongly en-dorsed the Bologna process and its minister of educationand science, Azis Pollozhani, is proving to be an effectiveleader of reform. The faculties and universities have alsostrongly endorsed movement toward the Bologna reformsand have begun to adopt some of the easier and more vis-ible elements (e.g., the European Credit and Transfer Sys-tem, ECTS) that is scheduled for full implementation by2004.

While interviewing scores of faculty andadministrators, the author encountered a strong resistanceto reform unless the dire financial problems of the facultiesare addressed. Yet academics were willing to talk aboutthe Bologna process, although here, too, financial concernswere dominant. Macedonian academics are eager to jointheir colleagues in the European mainstream and thuswilling to engage in the necessary reforms. Evengovernment officials outside the Ministry of Education and

Science also endorse the importance of moving into thisEuropean mainstream. For them it is an important step inthe larger goal of joining the European Union. Moreover,many leaders in ministries come from academia.

The Bologna process as a vehicle for reform finds favorwith most parties concerned and has become thecenterpiece of the Ministry of Education and Science policyreform efforts. Difficulties arise, however, over the meaningof particular reforms and the priority given under thebroad umbrella of Bologna. ECTS is easy but relativelysuperficial. Introducing a true credit and transfer systembetween faculties and universities strikes closer to the coreof resistance. For example, the current incentive structureis for each faculty to teach its own language, mathematics,and other courses. Developing a meaningful structure ofelective courses, especially outside of specific faculties andchanging the style of teaching and learning cut even closerto the core.

ConclusionReformers, both inside the government and academy andoutside officialdom, are using Bologna to push reformcloser to the core. Some see organizational reform, par-ticularly reduction of faculty autonomy, as a keystone andare citing Bologna to support the structural changes neededto formulate and implement the required academicchanges. These reformers cite not only Bologna but alsochanges already made in Slovenia and Croatia. Reformersinterested in greater equity of access for underrepresentedethnic communities, particularly the Albanians, also citeBologna process concerns expressed at Prague and else-where for diversity and democracy. But universities lead-ers are far less interested in the equity issue, which theydo not see as central to Bologna or of high priority.

One other reform lever of considerable importancenow under consideration is changing the way in whichgovernment funds flow to universities—that is, movingfrom the traditional method based on number of existingstaff to a more normative funding model based onenrollment and weighted enrollment for top governmentareas.

Whether Macedonia’s participation and use of theBologna process will result in substantive reforms is anopen question. Some powerful, entrenched interests willacquiesce or advocate superficial changes leading to EUrecognition, but they will strongly resist changes that mightdestabilize their power base or their ability to earn addedincome. Structural changes, both organizational andfinancial, may be within political reach and could havethe most far-reaching consequences of reform measures.If the rubric of the Bologna process can further thesechanges, then perhaps it will play a very important rolebeyond rhetoric.

25

News of the Center and the Program in Higher Education

Work is concluding on the bibliography on private higher education cosponsored by the Center and the Universityat Albany’s Program on Research on Private Higher Education (PROPHE). This project, which has been coordinatedby Alma Maldonado and Hong Zhu at the Center and colleagues at the University at Albany, will result in a biblio-graphical volume. The work will be part of PROPHE’s website on private higher education as well. Laura Rumbleyand Philippa Thiuri have also been helping with the bibliography. The Journal of Higher Education in Africa, edited byDr. Damtew Teferra and colleagues at CODESRIA in Senegal, will publish its inaugural issue in late 2003. This issuewill be followed by a theme issue focusing on the economics of higher education in Africa. Copies of the journal willbe available free of charge to readers in Africa. Please contact the journal ([email protected]) with any requests. In No-vember, the Center cosponsored a one-day seminar on accreditation and quality assurance, with a special focus onTaiwan, in cooperation with the Taiwan Economic and Cultural Office in Boston and the New England Associationof Schools and Colleges. The Center, in collaboration with the Ford Foundation, will be organizing a working con-ference on comparative higher education in spring 2004. Center director Philip G. Altbach recently spoke at a confer-ence on doctoral education at the UNESCO European Center for Higher Education in Bucharest, Romania. He willbe a visiting scholar at the University of Hong Kong in December and will also be a keynote speaker at a conferenceon higher education at Xiamen University in China.

Dr. Altbach, along with Professor Robert O. Berdahl of the University of Maryland and Professor PatriciaGumport of Stanford University, has completed work on a revised edition of their coedited book, American HigherEducation in the 2lst Century. This book will be published by the Johns Hopkins University Press in 2004. Arrangementsare currently under way for the translation and publication of several Center-sponsored books by the China OceanUniversity Press in Quingdao, China. Center graduate assistant Alma Maldonado, currently completing her doctoraldissertation, will join the faculty in higher education at the University of Arizona. Dr. Damtew Teferra recentlyattended a World Bank-Association of African Universities conference on higher education in Accra, Ghana.

Xabier Gorostiaga, SJFr. Xabier Gorostiaga, SJ, died in September in his native Basque Country of Spain after a long struggle with cancer.He was 66, and most recently was a senior leader of the Association of Jesuit Universities in Latin America. Xabierwas a visiting scholar at the CIHE in 1998, and I got to know him well during his year of study here. I traveled toChina with him and was amazed by both his energy and his intellectual curiosity as he revealed to me places centralto the important Jesuit history in China. Xabier studied economics at Cambridge University in England. He laterserved as director of planning in the revolutionary government in Nicaragua and was a senior adviser to the govern-ment of Panama during the negotiations with the United States concerning the return of the Panama Canal. He thenserved as rector of the University of Central America in Nicaragua. For these services, both Panama and Nicaraguagave him citizenship. Fr. Gorostiaga represents the best values of the Jesuits—his intellectual breadth and his abilityto translate his ideas into action characterized his life. He will be missed by his colleagues and friends.

—Philip G. Altbach

New Publications

Albornoz, Orlando. Higher EducationStrategies in Venezuela. Caracas, Venezu-ela: Bibliotechnology Ediciones, 2003.208 pp. (pb). ISBN 980-6605-00-4. Ad-dress: Bibliotechnology Ediciones, Apdo50-061, Caracas 1050-A, Venezuela.An analysis of the history and especiallythe current situation of Venezuelanhigher education under the Chavez gov-ernment, this book discusses the rela-tionship of the university to society in

turbulent times. From a sociological per-spective, the author discusses the in-creasing governmental control overhigher education, while laying out theconsequences for the future of scienceand scholarship.

Bowen, William G, and Sarah A. Levin.Reclaiming the Game: College Sports andEducational Values. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press, 2003. 490 pp.$27.95 (hb). ISBN 0-691-11620-2. Ad-dress: Princeton University Press, 41William St., Princeton NJ 08540, USA.

Collegiate athletics is, of course, big busi-ness in the United States. Many peoplecriticize some universities for an over-emphasis on such sports as football andbasketball, arguing that academic valuesare deemphasized and too much moneyis spent. This book, based on careful re-search, discusses sports in the IvyLeague schools, arguing that there areserious problems. Reforms are pro-posed.

Bu, Linping. Making the World Like Us:Education, Cultural Expansion and the


American Century. Westport, CT: PraegerPublishers, 2003. 279 pp. $69.95. (hb).ISBN 0-27597694-7. Address: PraegerPublishers, 88 Old Post Rd. West,Westport CT 06881, USA.A historical analysis of America’s inter-national educational and cultural poli-cies, this book discusses educationalexchange policies and practices duringthe 20th century, foreign educational as-sistance (using Teachers College of Co-lumbia University as a case study), andCold War diplomacy and educationalassistance. The changing role of the U.S.federal government as well as of phil-anthropic foundations and the academiccommunity is discussed.

García Guadilla, Carmen, ed. (2003).El difícil equilibrio: La educación supe-rior como bien público y comercio deservicios. Paris: Programa Columbus,2003. 143 pp. (pb). ISBN 9972-45-153-4. Address: Programa Columbus, 1 rueMiollis, 75732 Paris, France.A discussion of the implications ofGATS (General Agreement on Tradein Services) on higher education andits implications for the public good,this volume features analyses by au-thors from around the world. Amongthe topics considered are the commer-cialization of educational services, in-ternationalization in Europe and LatinAmerica, the role of higher educationas a commercial service, and the im-plications for Latin America of GATSand related developments.

Green, Madeleine F. and ChristaOlson. Internationalizing the Campus: AUser’s Guide. Washington, DC: Ameri-can Council on Education, 2003. 114pp. $34.95 (pb). Address: ACE Ful-fillment Service, Dept. 191, Washing-ton DC 20055, USA.This volume is a practical guide to in-ternationalizing academic institu-tions. It begins with definitions andpurposes of internationalization. Themain discussion concerns strategiesfor internationalization on individualcampuses. While the content relates tothe United States, the insights may berelevant elsewhere.

Grünzweig, Walter and NanaRinehart, eds. Rockin’ in Red Square:

Critical Approaches to International Edu-cation in the Age of Cyberculture.Münster, Germany: Lit Verlag, 2002.220 pp. (pb). ISBN 3-8258-6205-4. Ad-dress: Lit Verlag, Grevener Str. 179,48159 Münster, Germany.This rather oddly titled book consistsof a series of essays discussing the roleand definitions of internationalizationin higher education. The contributorsare specialists on foreign study and in-ternational education from Europeand North America. Among the top-ics considered are cross-cultural“deepening,” study abroad and glo-balization, issues relating to U.S. stu-dents abroad, engineering andinternational education, and the roleof information technology in interna-tional education.

Kwesiga, Joyce C. Women’s Access toHigher Education in Africa: Uganda’sExperience.Kampala, Uganda: FountainPublishers, 2002. 309 pp. ISBN 9970-02-295-4. Address: Foundation Publishers,POB 488, Kampala, Uganda.Focusing on the problems of women’saccess to higher education in Uganda,this book provides an overview of theliterature on women and higher educa-tion in developing countries and in Af-rica and then focuses on the specificissues related to Uganda. There is alsoan analysis of the Uganda educationsystem. The research on which thisstudy is based is a survey of 643 stu-dents and interviews with heads of edu-cational institutions. Issues such asfamily and societal influences, studentattitudes, and related themes are dis-cussed.

Kwiek, Marek, ed., The University, Glo-balization, Central Europe. Frankfurtam Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2003.260 pp. (pb). ISBN: 3-361-50813-1.A collection of essays focusing on issuesrelevant to higher education develop-ment in Central and Eastern Europe,this volume considers such topics asacademic freedom, accreditation, therole of the nation state in higher educa-tion policy, cultural politics and highereducation, the role of the disciplines,and the role of liberal education. Theauthors reflect a variety of national per-spectives.

Kwiatkowski, Stefan and Jan Sadlak,eds., Knowledge Café for Intellectual En-trepreneurship through HigherEducation.Warsaw, Poland: Academyof Entrepreneurship and Manage-ment, 2003. 304 pp. (pb). ISBN: 83-86846-95.X, Address: Academy ofEntrepreneurship and Management,Jagiellonska St. 59, 00-987 Warsaw,Poland.A wide-ranging discussion of topicsrelating to the role of entrepreneur-ship, leadership, and technology in achanging academic environment, thisbook focuses on several case studiesin Central and Eastern Europe and onbroad issues.

Leisyte, Liudvika. Higher EducationGovernance in Post-Soviet Lithuania.Oslo, Norway: Institute for Educa-tional Research, University of Oslo,2002. 128 pp. (pb). ISBN 82-569-6106-6. Address, Institute for EducationalResearch, POB 1092, Blindern, N-0317Oslo, Norway.During the Soviet era, Lithuanian uni-versities were highly centralized.Since 1990, they have moved to amodel of looser state supervision, al-though there are tensions between theinstitutions and the state. This studyexamines the continuing struggle be-tween state control and university in-dependence. Historical analysis of thedevelopment of Lithuanian highereducation is included as well.

Lewis, Darrell R. and James Hearn,eds. The Public Research University:Serving the Public Good in New Times.Lanham, MD: University Press ofAmerica, 2003. 260 pp. $40 (pb). ISBN:0-7618-2517-7. Address: UniversityPress of America, 4501 Forbes Blvd.,Lanham, MD 20706, USA.An edited volume based on a casestudy of the University of Minnesota,one of the major public research uni-versities in the United States, this vol-ume features discussions of suchtopics as the public good and publicresearch universities, nonmonetaryrewards of undergraduate education,the role of libraries, technology trans-fer, the historical background of theUniversity of Minnesota, and others.

27

Maiworm, Friedhelm and BerndWächter, eds. English-Language-TaughtDegree Programmes in European HigherEducation: Trends and Success Factors.Bonn, Germany: Lemmons Verlag,2002. 136 pp. (pb). ISBN: 3-932306-47-3. Address: Lemmens Verlag,Matthias-Grünewald-Str. 1-3, D-53175Bonn, Germany.A publication in the valuable series oninternational cooperation in educationof the Academic Cooperation Associa-tion, this volume analyzes the grow-ing number of programs taught inEnglish in European universities. Theauthors see the proliferation of En-glish-taught programs as part of theinternationalization of higher educa-tion in Europe. A Europe-wide ques-tionnaire plus case studies were usedfor this research—it was found that 30percent of the responding universitieshad programs in English. Universitiesin Denmark, the Czech Republic, Ger-many, Belgium, Finland, Norway, andthe Netherlands were studied. Cur-riculum, staffing, and other aspects ofthe organization of the programs weresurveyed.

Mário, Moutzinho, Peter Fry, LisbethLevey, and Arlindo Chilundo. HigherEducation in Mozambique, Oxford, UK:James Currey, Ltd., 2003. 133 pp. (pb).ISBN: 0-85255-430-3. Address: JamesCurrey Publishers, 73 Botley Rd., Ox-ford OX2 OBS, UK.Mozambique emerged from years ofcolonialism and civil war recently.This fact makes the remarkablegrowth of its higher education systemespecially impressive. This volumeanalyzes the historical developmentof higher education and then focuseson key aspects of contemporary devel-opment—including equity and accessfor students, the role of the teachingstaff, information technology, financeand governance, and similar topics.This volume is part of a new seriespublished by the Partnership forHigher Education in Africa.

Mkude, Daniel, Brian Cooksey, andLisbeth Levy. Higher Education in Tan-zania. Oxford, UK: James Currey, Ltd.,2003. 114 pp. (pb). ISBN: 0-85255-425-7. Address: James Currey Publishers,73 Botley Rd., Oxford OX2 OBS, UK.

Emerging from a decade of declinein the 1980s, the University of Dares Salaam, the main subject of thisvolume, has achieved impressiveresults recently. This volume ana-lyzes the role of the university inTanzanian society and discusses in-stitutional transformation in theuniversity. This volume is part of anew series published by the Partner-ship for Higher Education in Africa.

Musisi, Nakanyike B. and NansoziK. Muwanga, Makerere University inTransition, 1993-2000. Oxford, UK:James Currey, Ltd., 2003. 103 pp.(pb). ISBN: 0-85255-426-5. Address:James Currey Publishers, 73 BotleyRd., Oxford OX2 OBS, UK.One of the most important univer-s i t ies on the Afr ican cont inent ,Makerere has been buffeted by po-litical and economic crises during itshistory. This volume traces the his-tory and development of the univer-sity through its various phases.There is a special emphasis on re-forms and on the adaptation of theuniversity to change. This volume ispart of a new series published by thePartnership for Higher Education inAfrica.

Smart, John C., ed., Higher Education:Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol.17. Dordrecht, the Netherlands,Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.503 pp. (hb). ISBN; 0-87586-136-9.Address: Kluwer Academic Publish-ers, POB 17, 3300 AZ Dordrecht,Netherlands.Now in its 17th year of publication,this valuable series provides de-tailed research-based essays on as-pects of higher education in aneffort to offer readers a “state of theart” on the topic. In this volume, thesubjects considered include studentmotivation and self-regulated learn-ing, degree aspirations for Latinoand African-American students,state financial aid programs, thechanging role of the community col-lege, doctoral student socialization,and several others. While the essaysfocus mainly on the United Statesand cite mainly U.S. data, most ofthe topics have international rel-evance.

Wellman, Jane V. and Thomas Ehrlich,eds. How the Student Credit HourShapes Higher Education: The Tie ThatBinds, New Directions for Higher Edu-cation, No. 122 (Summer, 2003), pp. 1-127. Address: Jossey-Bass Publishers,989 Market St., San Francisco, CA94103, USA.The focus of this collection of essaysconcerning the use of the credit-hoursystem in the United States is under-standing how it affects innovation, thework of the faculty, accreditation, bud-geting and related areas. The essays ar-gue that the credit-hour system isdeeply embedded in U.S. higher edu-cation and that it tends to stifle innova-tion. The chapters point out that thereare few clear rules concerning howcredit hours are allocated and little su-pervision. One chapter discusses theinternational use of credit hours andpoints out that there is a trend towardallocating them. The European Union,especially, is concerned with mobilitywithin the EU nations and the credit-hour system is a way to manage thismobility.

Williams, Gareth, ed., The EnterprisingUniversity: Reform, Excellence and Equity.Buckingham, UK: Open UniversityPress, 2003. 193 pp. (hb). $102. ISBN:033521072-4. Address: Open UniversityPress, 22 Ballmoor, Burkingham MK181XW, UK.The overall focus of this edited volumeis on the permutations of the “enterpriseuniversity”—the impact of markets andmarked-oriented thinking on highereducation. Chapters explore the impactof this concept on academic institutions,the professoriate, the relationship be-tween the university and the workplace,and approaches to the generation of in-come. While most of the chapters fo-cus on the United Kingdom, there areconsiderations of American, South Af-rican, and Commonwealth experi-ences.

World Bank, Lifelong Learning in the Glo-bal Knowledge Economy. Washington,DC: World Bank, 2003. 141 pp. $25 (pb).ISBN: 0-8213-5475-2. Address: WorldBank, 11818 H St. NW, Washington DC.20433, USA.While not necessarily postsecondaryeducation, lifelong learning is very


An Initiative in International Higher Education

ISSN: 1084-0613

Editorial Office

Center for International Higher Education Campion Hall Boston College Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 USA Tel: (617) 552-4236 Fax: (617) 552-8422 E-Mail: [email protected] http://www.bc.edu/cihe/

Editor: Philip G. Altbach Assistant Editor: Robin M. Helms

International Higher Education is publishedquarterly by the Center for InternationalHigher Education. We welcome correspon-dence, ideas for articles, and reports. If youwould like to be placed on our mailing list,please write to the editor on your businessletterhead.There is no charge for a subscription.

Material in this newsletter may be repro-duced. Please cite the original source ofpublication. Opinions expressed here donot necessarily reflect the views of the Cen-ter for International Higher Education.

INTERNATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION

Our WebsiteThe Center’s award-winning website is a useful source of information and analysison higher education worldwide. All back issues of International Higher Education areavailable, and an index provides easy access to articles by topic and country. Centerpublications are also available, and links to relevant higher education websites andinformation are provided. We are a featured e-link of the World Bank and otheragencies.

The Program in Higher Education in the Lynch School of Education, Boston CollegeThe Center is closely related to the program in higher education at Boston College.The program offers master’s and doctoral degree study in the field of higher educa-tion. The program has been preparing professionals in higher education for threedecades. It features a rigorous social science–based approach to the study of highereducation, combining a concern with the broader theoretical issues relating to highereducation and an understanding of the practice of academic administration. TheAdministrative Fellows initiative provides financial assistance as well as work ex-perience in a variety of administrative settings. Specialization is offered in highereducation administration, student affairs and development, international higher edu-cation, and other areas. Additional information about the program is available fromDr. Karen Arnold, coordinator of the program in higher education, Lynch School ofEducation, Campion Hall, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467, USA. Fax: (617)552-8422. E-mail: <[email protected]>. More information about the program—in-cluding course descriptions and degree requirements—can be found on-line at theprogram’s website: <http://infoeagle.bc.edic/bc_org/avp/soe/hea/JEA/html>.International Higher Education is available full-text on our website. Web-based sub-scriptions are also available.

The Boston College Center for International Higher Education provides a unique service to colleges and universities worldwide by focusing on the global realities of higher education. Our goal is to bring an international consciousness to the

analysis of higher education. We are convinced that an international perspective will contribute to enlightened policy and prac-tice. To serve this goal, the Center publishes International Higher Education, a book series on higher education, and other publica-tions. We sponsor occasional conferences on key issues in higher education and maintain a resource base for researchers andpolicymakers. The Center welcomes visiting scholars for periods of study and reflection. We have a special concern for academicinstitutions in the Jesuit tradition worldwide, and more broadly with Catholic universities. The Center is also concerned withcreating dialogue and cooperation among academic institutions in industrialized nations and in developing countries. We areconvinced that our future depends on effective collaboration and the creation of an international community focused on theimprovement of higher education in the public interest.Our work is supported by the Ford Foundation and by the Lynch School of Education atBoston College. We are indebted to these funders for core sponsorship.

much part of the broader educationagenda of most societies. This WorldBank report discusses the role of life-long learning in the knowledgeeconomy. An increasingly complex la-bor market and demands on theworkforce make lifelong learning agrowing focus. The report discusses fi-nancing lifelong learning as well as thedevelopment of systems to ensure thatlifelong learning is appropriately gov-erned.

New Publication SeriesThe Council on Higher Education ofSouth Africa has inaugurated a new se-ries of publications on higher educationissues as they affect South Africa. The se-ries, called “Kagisano—CHE Higher Edu-cation Discussion Series” appearsoccasionally. Among the first publicationsare ”Good Governance in Higher Educa-tion: Reflections on Co-operative Gover-nance in South African HigherEducation,” (46 pp) and “The General

Agreement on Trade in Services andSouth African Higher Education: WhatShould South Africa Do?” (73 pp). Thepublications include thoughtful analy-sis by South African and internationalexperts on topics of importance not onlyfor South Africa but for other countriesas well. Additional information can beobtained from the Council on HigherEducation, POB 13354, The Tramshed0126, South Africa. http://www.che.ac.za.

The Boston College Center for International Higher Educationand in ways that meet our national...

Documents

Transcript of The Boston College Center for International Higher Educationand in ways that meet our national...