Suchergebnisse

Examining the relationship between higher education policy and the state, the book focuses on the ways in which the changing concepts of the nature of the state and its role have had an impact on the development of higher education policy in the last thirty years. The authors study the dynamics behind the shift from state-subsidised independence to ambiguous but increased dependence on and deference to the state's policies. Employing the latest extensive research and interview material, the book looks at: the major changes in higher education policy, the changes in the nature of the state, the changes in states machinery for policy implementation, how policies emerge, and how continuous they are, the influence of interest groups and elites on policy-making and implementation, the changes in institutional government. Die Untersuchung bezieht sich auf den Zeitraum 1945-1997. (HoF/text adopted)

The history of Turkish higher education and recent challenges. - S. 15-28 The governance of higher education in Turkey. - S. 29-46 Institutional patterns and quantitative developments. - S. 47-72 Degrees and programs. - S. 73-82 Faculty structure and academic work - S. 83-92 Students and graduates. - S. 93-94 The future of higher education in Turkey. - S. 95-106

Johan Olsen, a well known expert on higher education, asked the following question: "Is Europeanization as disappointing a term as it is fashionable? Should it be abandoned or is it useful for understanding European transformations? It is our assessment that the concept of Europeanization is rather useful, despite being occasionally vague. In fact, its vagueness contributes to the flexibility which the EU member states want to maintain, while they try to achieve common goals through coordination and a process free from regulation and supranational decision-making. The freedom, autonomy and diversity of European higher education have helped the development of one of the most successful and the best-performing systems of higher education worldwide. In only three years, there will be a European Higher Education Area. Present day achievements in higher education are the building blocks of tomorrow's common EHEA. Europeanization is paving the way, we should maintain it and continue with it.

Tremendous changes are affecting the structure and funding of higher education in many countries. This volume attempts to identify and analyze the principles, structural features and modes of work of the different higher education policies operating in eleven countries, as well as their commonalities and differences in the light of both general international trends and country-specific factors. In order to gather the relevant information for the project, national correspondents were provided with an overarching framework to guide them in their work and to ensure maximum comparability of the r

In this paper, it is pointed out that from the time immemorial man is searching ways and means for autonomy, maybe in such matters as spiritual, political, social reformation, discoveries, invention, etc. Autonomy in education is expected to achieve autonomy in other areas of real-life, worldly affairs. In India, the buzz word since the last two decades is autonomy in higher education. We have several models in higher education found and established in Post Graduate (PG) programmes of University, Indian Institute of Technology ( IIT) or Indian Institute of Management ( IIM). These institutions one-way or the other imbibe some elements of autonomy in education. A brief literature review presents some concepts of autonomy and their scope of implementation as perceived worldwide. It is pointed out that the concept of autonomy is being tried out since many decades and researchers have made some proposals to have a better perception of autonomy. An overview of autonomy in higher education in India is presented, as viewed either by UGC or Vice-Chancellors. The author has proposed that a teacher (referred to as a roaming university) is the first link in education chain to be autonomous in a real sense followed by autonomy at such levels as university/institution, management, regulatory bodies, and then at the national level. The author has made some suggestions for each level for inculcating autonomy. For instance, some suggestions are clear national policy, least regulations, reformulation of laws, autonomous management, autonomous institutions awarding degrees, five years teacher's tenure, lean system, etc. The article will be of interest to all autonomous personnel concerned.

Presented is an overview of the complex decision-making process determining policies affecting higher education in the US. Postsecondary education is characterized by intense diversity; illustrative issues are presented from the institutional, state, national, & transnational levels. A number of different visions of what the U should be have been combined to produce the US U's modern form. W. H. Stoddard.

Text from van Zanten A., Legavre A. "Engineering access to higher education through higher education fairs", in Goastellec G., Picard F. (ed.) The Roles of Higher Education and Research in the Fabric of Societies, Leuven, Sense Publishers, 2014 (in press). Transition to higher education is a major social process. This transition has been mostly studied by French sociologists of education and higher education from perspectives focusing predominantly on the role of the socio-economic status, academic profiles and different tracks followed by secondary school students (Merle 1996, Duru-Bellat and Kieffer 2008, Convert 2010), and, to a lesser extent, on the types of secondary schools attended (Duru-Bellat and Mingat 1998, Nakhili 2005) and the local higher education provision (Berthet et al. 2010, Orange 2013). Although these structural determinants play a major role in explaining significant regularities, they provide more powerful explanations for individuals representing the extremes of the different variables considered, leaving room for the influence of other major factors for those students in intermediate situations. In addition, even in the case of students occupying extreme positions, structural perspectives better explain the distribution of students between different higher education tracks than they do between institutions and disciplines. In this chapter, we adopt a perspective that we see as complementary to and interacting with the perspective centred on structural determinants by focusing on the role of the devices that mediate the exchanges between students and higher education institutions, and more specifically on one device: higher education fairs. Our purpose in doing so is not only to document how these various devices frame, in ways that remain largely unexplored by researchers, exchanges between providers and consumers of higher education but also to point out - and further explore in future publications - how these devices, and the specific features of fairs, contribute to the reproduction and transformation of educational inequalities in access to higher education (Benninghoff et al. 2012).

Text from van Zanten A., Legavre A. "Engineering access to higher education through higher education fairs", in Goastellec G., Picard F. (ed.) The Roles of Higher Education and Research in the Fabric of Societies, Leuven, Sense Publishers, 2014 (in press). Transition to higher education is a major social process. This transition has been mostly studied by French sociologists of education and higher education from perspectives focusing predominantly on the role of the socio-economic status, academic profiles and different tracks followed by secondary school students (Merle 1996, Duru-Bellat and Kieffer 2008, Convert 2010), and, to a lesser extent, on the types of secondary schools attended (Duru-Bellat and Mingat 1998, Nakhili 2005) and the local higher education provision (Berthet et al. 2010, Orange 2013). Although these structural determinants play a major role in explaining significant regularities, they provide more powerful explanations for individuals representing the extremes of the different variables considered, leaving room for the influence of other major factors for those students in intermediate situations. In addition, even in the case of students occupying extreme positions, structural perspectives better explain the distribution of students between different higher education tracks than they do between institutions and disciplines. In this chapter, we adopt a perspective that we see as complementary to and interacting with the perspective centred on structural determinants by focusing on the role of the devices that mediate the exchanges between students and higher education institutions, and more specifically on one device: higher education fairs. Our purpose in doing so is not only to document how these various devices frame, in ways that remain largely unexplored by researchers, exchanges between providers and consumers of higher education but also to point out - and further explore in future publications - how these devices, and the specific features of fairs, contribute to the reproduction ...