Suchergebnisse

In this contribution both the literature and the present-day policies regarding diversity in higher education systems will be discussed. The first part presents an overview of the theoretical and empirical studies on differentiation and diversity. Based on this, a conceptual framework is presented, which intends to explain the processes of differentiation and dedifferentiation in higher education systems. Two crucial variables are identified, and both have a crucial impact on the behaviour of higher education institutions: the level of uniformity in the environment of higher education institutions and the level of influence of academic norms and values in these institutions. The second part of this contribution focuses on current higher education policies. Hoping to create better and stronger contributions by higher education institutions to the 'knowledge society', many governments nowadays develop policies of less state control and more autonomy. It will be argued that these policies do not automatically lead to more diversity in higher education systems. The reason for this is simply that markets work imperfectly in higher education systems and that the behaviour of higher education institutions is triggered by competition for reputation, a process producing several unintended consequences. In this latter context the recent rankings and typologies in higher education are also discussed.

There is a good deal of consensus that institutional diversity in higher education is a good thing. Simply put, systems with more diverse institutions perform better than systems with less diverse institutions. Yet the overall diversity of Australia's higher education system remains unclear. Significant questions and opportunities remain unresolved. How diverse are Australia's institutions today? How can stakeholders— particularly institutions and policymakers—understand and manage this diversity? In this project the LH Martin Institute and Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) seek to shift discussion of diversity to a more considered level. We don't promise neat solutions, but our analysis moves beyond extant sectoral partitionings and contingent policy interventions to expose emerging dynamics and prospects for institutions, and hence for the system as a whole. We have produced evidence-based profiles for Australian universities below that mirror those being rolled out globally—namely U-Map and U-Multirank. Each institution profiles contains five dimensions: Teaching and Learning, Student Profile, Research Involvement, Knowledge Exchange, and International Orientation. Each dimension contains a suite of data-driven indicators. The research briefing below further contextualises the profiles by considering extensions to the indicator mix, to the population of institutions and level of analysis, and next steps that can be taken to further the transparency of the Australian university and, ultimately, tertiary education sector. Our ultimate aim is to seed a new formative and evidence-based discussion that will enhance national policy and each institution's strategy.

This independent report commissioned by North West University (NWU) contradicts the university's recently published claim that it has bridged its racial divisions and addressed historical inequalities. According to the 10-year review, "Present management structures and practices are not fully conducive to achieving transformation goals [and] … racial and gender imbalances persist in the composition of student and academic staff bodies." The report follows NWU's own review published in December 2013. NWU's own findings on campus divisions differ substantially from those of the independent panel. Both reviews assess the extent to which NWU has met the many targets it set in 2004, when the government merged the formerly white, Afrikaans-medium Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education and Mafikeng's former University of Bophuthatswana.