Search results

The increasing push towards centralisation and bureaucratisation in higher education, further exacerbated by the disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, calls for a better understanding of the nature of collegiality in contemporary universities. We address this issue by looking into the necessary conditions and barriers to sustaining a collegiate environment. The empirical focus is on academics, academic leaders and professional support staff at Anonymous Business School (ABS), a department in a large civic UK university. We interviewed 32 participants across the school, ranging from early-career academics to experienced professors and members of department leadership teams. The findings suggest multiple emerging perspectives on collegiality, with features of horizontal collegiality perceived as key to successful academic responses to the crisis. The findings also indicate how sustaining a collegiate environment within the department requires both choice and effort from leadership and from staff, particularly when decision-making is primarily located at the centre of the university. The choice and effort made across different collegiate pockets contribute to the department becoming an ‘island of collegiality’ within the increasingly centralised and bureaucratised university hierarchy. In this sense, the actions of the department leadership to establish supporting mechanisms, and the actions of the staff to, in turn, embrace and build interpersonal relationships and professional identities, are key to sustaining a collegiate environment.

At the centre of Chapter 2 is higher education that places greater emphasis on lifelong learning journeys and equitable access to quality education at all stages of an individual's life and career. This chapter articulates the relevance of learning outcomes for both the world of work and for citizenship in a global and interconnected world. One way to operationalize this dual emphasis is through micro-credentials, which offer a flexible and modular way to learn new skills and knowledge. The chapter notes current challenges with implementing micro-credentials in a robust and quality assured manner, and suggests ways to overcome these.

Mentoring is a valuable support system for academics wishing to implement micro-credentials and contribute to the achievement of all sustainable development goals. Mentors can help nurture initial ideas, guide the design and delivery of micro-credentials and ensure that they are aligned with the needs of students and university external stakeholders. The dialogue included in this chapter illustrates a specific scenario at undergraduate level. There is, however, recognition that a broader range of contexts for micro-credentials exists, where mentoring can provide equally valuable support towards achieving desired goals.

With specific reference to mentoring, the chapter discusses ways in which mentoring relationships can develop and be maintained over time. It considers the impact that the setting in which mentoring meetings take place can have on the quality of the learning experience. Equally importantly, discussion touches on digital dimensions of mentoring – the metaverse as a setting and artificial intelligence complementing a real mentor or coach.

The aim of this chapter is to describe a four-type model of organisational structures and to discuss two cases, Embrapa and the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, as well as additional cases at SAM-Research and the centre for shared medical support services established at the University of Bologna.

These cases should help readers understand the importance of designing distinctive, tailored-made support services while keeping these structures flexible for further adaptation under unforeseen changes.

The chapter concludes by stressing the role of institutions to steadily invest in the design of these tailored support structures and in personalised training for their support staff.

This chapter discusses the process of initiating and developing an open and ongoing conversation about values within a doctoral community in an education research center located within a British university. To do this, the authors first articulate the local and institutional context of this specific doctoral community and the intersections of values declared by the host institution and the specific research center.

This chapter then moves on to describing the process of building an open conversation with postgraduate researchers (PGRs) and staff supporting them. This open conversation questions and explores the institutionally stated values, starting from collaboratively negotiated guiding questions and prompts. The discussion of responses to those prompts, obtained through an anonymous online platform, grounds then a discussion of how values can become relevant and rooted in everyday experience for PGRs. The authors, as a collective, use the concept of “boundaries,” emerged in the conversations themselves but also relevant in academic literature, as a linking concept for the discussion of the responses.

The discussion then concludes by articulating the broader impact of the engagement in these conversations about values within and beyond the boundaries of the host institution and argues for the importance of such ongoing conversations as fundamental elements of fostering value-based communities and cultures in higher education contexts.

The theme of collegiality and more broadly of changes in the governance of universities has attracted growing interest within the sociology of higher education. As institutions, contemporary universities are inhabited by competing logics often defined in terms of market pressures and are shaped by the higher education policies of governments. Collegiality is an ideal-type form of university governance based on expertise and scientific excellence. Our study looks at manifestations of collegiality in two publicly funded universities in Canada. Collegiality is explored through the structural attributes of governance arrangements and academic culture in action as a form of self-governance. Case studies rely on two data sources: (1) policy documents and secondary data on various aspects of university development, and (2) semi-structured interviews with key players in the governance of these organisations, including unions. Two main findings with implications for the enactment of collegiality as a governance mode in universities are discussed. The first is that governance structures are slowly transitioning into more hybrid and corporate forms, where academics remain influential but share and negotiate influence with a broader set of stakeholders. The second is the appearance of forces that promote a delocalisation of collegiality, where academics invest in external scientific networks to assert collegiality and self-governance and may disinvest in their own institution, thus contributing to the redefinition of academic citizenship. Status differentiation among academic colleagues is associated with the externalisation of collegiality. Mechanisms to associate collegiality with changes in universities and their environment need to be further explored.

This chapter contributes to the scholarship of teaching and learning in extracurricular enterprise and entrepreneurship education. It draws on research from two annual ‘Business Challenge Weeks’ (BCW) held at Oxford Brookes University in 2021 and 2022, in which teams of postgraduate students from three faculties worked on external client projects, supported by an academic mentor. It presents and discusses findings derived from a survey and interviews conducted after the second of these years. The chapter takes a transdisciplinary perspective, after Budwig and Alexander (2020), Piaget (1972) and Klein et al. (2001) and explores the relationship between this and the enterprise and entrepreneurship development pipeline set out by QAA (2018). It analyses the experiences of the three main participating groups engaged in the challenge weeks – students, external clients and academic mentors – and explores the organising challenges inherent in multiparty pedagogical initiatives. The chapter contributes to knowledge in this area by revealing and reflecting on the motivations and expectations of the three participant groups, the roles they played during the week and the outcomes they reported. It also expands understanding of transdisciplinary enterprise pedagogy.

Supporting students transitioning from high school into college continues to be a challenge for academics and policy-makers. Composition assignments that include Kuh’s (2008) High Impact Practices (HIP) and the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) rubric and HIP tenets of Civic Learning and Community Engagement (Fig. 1), help foster opportunities for empathy, which develops students’ abilities to think critically, write well, and succeed in college and beyond. While effective college teaching and instruction are necessary, increasing enrollments, and increasing percentages of First-Year Composition (FYC) students requiring supportive composition courses compound the difficulties of the effort. According to AAC&U, “a global community requires a more informed, engaged, and socially responsible citizenry” (2009, p. 1; Finley & McNair, 2013). In other words, educators and employers believe that “personal and social responsibility should be core elements of a 21^st-century education” (AAC&U, 2009, p. 1). This conceptual content analysis study framed by HIP analyzed 10 FYC syllabi from different composition faculty at one urban Hispanic public four-year university (SMU) in Southern California during the 2015–2016 academic year in the context of the university’s mission statement embracing Civic Learning and Community Engagement for FYC students.