Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Half Title -- Series Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Contributors -- Series Editors' Introduction -- 1 Access to Higher Education -- The Public Value of Further Massification of Higher Education -- From Elite to Universal Higher Education: Increasing Diversity -- Further Massification Increases Policy Complexity -- Structure of the Book -- References -- Part I Institutional Diversity -- 2 Access, Equity and the Participation of Disadvantaged Groups -- Three Policy-Theory Debates and Dilemmas -- Expansion and its Effects -- Universal Access as a Concept and Category -- Interventions and Their Reach -- Low Policy and the Passage to Mass Higher Education -- Differential Expansion and Binary Abolition -- Demography, Efficient Expansion and a Widening of Access -- Demand-Led Growth and its Outcomes for Participation -- High Policy and the Drive to Near-Universal Access -- Outreach, Recruitment, and Retention -- A Special Mission for Further Education Colleges -- A 50 Per Cent Participation Target and a New Flagship Qualification -- Fair Admissions, Fee Deregulation, and an Access Regulator -- Progress and Appraisal -- Policies for Widening Participation 1997-2010 -- A Strategy for Access and Student Success in a Public-Private System -- References -- 3 Government Policies as Responses to Increased Demand for Higher Education -- Introduction -- Higher Education Expansion in Growing Asian Economies -- Major Trends in Governments' Responses to Increased Access -- Privatisation of Public Higher Education -- Promotion of Private Higher Education -- Opportunities and Barriers -- Cost-Sharing -- Institutional Diversity -- Autonomy -- Quality and Efficiency -- Private-Public Interfaces on Access: A Public Policy Revisit -- Notes -- References -- 4 Digital Players in an Analogue World -- Introduction.

Worldwide, scholarship and policy-making develop new ideas and models for the role of higher education and research in society and economy. This development points to changing relationships and boundaries between the public and private spheres in higher education including their public and private steering and funding, public-private partnerships between universities and firms, the rise of private higher education and of business models in the management of universities. The contributions to this edited volume investigate into the dynamics of blurring boundaries between the public and the private in higher education and their consequences for the university.

In this working paper we reflect upon performance agreements in higher education (HE): during the last decade, performance-based steering tools were introduced or reformed in almost every higher education system. They are regarded as a promising instrument to contribute to the achievement of high quality higher education, but in countries that have a longer history with performance agreements (such as many U.S. and German states, Austria, Finland and Denmark) sometimes significant changes have taken place between generations, and we want to understand why this is. With this working paper we highlight a number of key issues to be taken into account when the introduction or evaluation of performance agreements is being considered. We have gathered information (from laws, white papers, websites of governments and institutions, and expert interviews) on a range of higher education systems alongside a general literature review. We argue policy makers should not to copy 'blindly' the design and implementation of performance agreements from other countries, as their culture, political and legal system, policy style, size, HE system characteristics and strategic agendas are different. Nonetheless, experiences from elsewhere are an important source for inspiration and a valuable input

Worldwide, scholarship and policy-making develop new ideas and models for the role of higher education and research in society and economy. This development points to changing relationships and boundaries between the public and private spheres in higher education including their public and private steering and funding, public-private partnerships between universities and firms, the rise of private higher education and of business models in the management of universities. The contributions to this edited volume investigate into the dynamics of blurring boundaries between the public and the private in higher education and their consequences for the university.

As public research organisations are increasingly driven by their national and regional governments to engage in knowledge transfer, they have started to support the creation of companies. These research based spin-off companies (RBSOs) often keep contacts with the research institutes they originate from. In this paper we present the results of a study of four research institutes within two universities and two non-university public research organisations (PROs) in the Netherlands. We show that research organisations have distinct motivations to support the creation of spin-off companies. In terms of resources RBSOs contribute, mostly in a modest way, to research activities by providing information, equipment and monetary resources. In particular, RBSOs are helpful for researchers competing for research grants that demand participation of industry. Furthermore, RBSOs may be seen as a proactive response by Dutch public research organisations to demands of economic relevance from their institutional environment. RBSOs enhance the prestige of their parent organisations and create legitimacy for public funds invested in PROs. At the same time, most RBSOs do not have a significant impact on the direction of the research conducted at the PROs.

Improving completion and reducing dropout in higher education are key concerns for higher education in Europe. This study on dropout and completion in higher education in Europe demonstrates that national governments and higher education institutions use three different study success objectives: completion, time-to-degree and retention. To address these objectives policy makers at national and institutional level apply various policy instruments. These can be categorized under three main policy headings: financial incentives; information and support for students; and organizational issues. The evidence indicates that countries that have more explicit study success objectives, targets and policies are likely to be more successful. Particularly if the policy approach is comprehensive and consistent. As such, it is important that study success is an issue in the information provision to (prospective) students, in financial incentives for students and institutions, in quality assurance, and in the education pathways offered to students. Furthermore, increasing the responsibility of higher education institutions for study success, for example in the area of selecting, matching, tracking, counselling, mentoring and integrating students in academic life is clearly effective. Finally, to support the policy debate and monitoring of study success evidence, there is a need for more systematic international comparative data and thorough analysis of the effectiveness of study success policies

Higher education is a dynamic field. It is, however, also a field where changes don¿t take place overnight. This 2004 update report covers a period of 1.5 years, a period in which some earlier policy initiatives have been implemented and new ones have emerged. It is therefore not surprising to observe that many of the policy issues on the agenda in the previous Update Report (April, 2003) still are a topic of debate today. The main part of the report are the descriptions of the current (2004) higher education debates and policy initiatives for each of the eleven IHEM countries, arranged in four themes educational and research infrastructure, finance, governance and quality. In conclusion, four `overarching¿ policy issues in contemporary European (and Australian) higher education are discussed. These issues are: * The Bologna process and changing degree structures * The changing organisation of research * Financial accountability and responsibility * Interactive governance