Search results

This paper aims to address research gaps around third party data flows in education by investigating governance practices in higher education with respect to learning management system (LMS) ecosystems. The authors answer the following research questions: how are LMS and plugins/learning tools interoperability (LTI) governed at higher education institutions? Who is responsible for data governance activities around LMS? What is the current state of governance over LMS? What is the current state of governance over LMS plugins, LTI, etc.? What governance issues are unresolved in this domain? How are issues of privacy and governance regarding LMS and plugins/LTIs documented or communicated to the public and/or community members?

This study involved three components: (1) An online questionnaire about LMS, plugin and LTI governance practices from information technology professionals at seven universities in the USA (n = 4) and Canada (n = 3). The responses from these individuals helped us frame and design the interview schedule. (2) A review of public data from 112 universities about LMS plugin and LTI governance. Eighteen of these universities provide additional documentation, which we analyze in further depth. (3) A series of extensive interviews with 25 university data governance officers with responsibilities for LMS, plugin and/or LTI governance, representing 14 different universities.

The results indicate a portrait of fragmented and unobtrusive, unnoticed student information flows to third parties. From coordination problems on individual college campuses to disparate distributions of authority across campuses, as well as from significant data collection via individual LTIs to a shared problem of scope across many LTIs, the authors see that increased and intentional governance is needed to improve the state of student privacy and provide transparency in the complex environment around LMSs. Yet, the authors also see that there are logical paths forward based on successful governance and leveraging existing collaborative networks among data governance professionals in higher education.

Substantial prior work has examined issues of privacy in the education context, although little research has directly examined higher education institutions’ governance practices of LMS, plugin and LTI ecosystems. The tight integration of first and third-party tools in this ecosystem raises concerns that student data may be accessed and shared without sufficient transparency or oversight and in violation of established education privacy norms. However, these technologies and the university governance practices that could check inappropriate data handling remain under-scrutinized. This paper addresses this gap by investigating the governance practices of higher education institutions with respect to LMS ecosystems.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate and assess the role played by university governance in the effectiveness and efficiency of the higher education system through literature analysis and the management evaluation method of Organization and Methods (the O and M technique) and argue for a more radical change in, and greater scrutiny of, university governance so as to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of university operations and thus yield a more optimal satisfaction of social needs.

The paper employs the O and M technique in order to investigate and assess the role played by university governance in the effectiveness and efficiency of the higher education system.

The “objective” is education and knowledge and there is no room for experimentation in the system. The higher education sector does not need experiments to develop further. Rather, it deserves cautious, creative and innovative consideration and needs a very distinctive treatment of national problems. No matter the policy orientation of the system, higher education policy makers should not forget that higher education has a tremendous influence on peoples’ attitudes and beliefs so the focus should be on the actual knowledge on social responsibility and on the commitment of higher education to serve social interests and needs.

The analysis developed in this study would benefit from a deeper exploration by investigating more numerous and diverse examples from the international arena of higher education.

This study acts as a complement to previous research on higher education governance since it develops further the analysis and the understanding of university governance. By using as examples two countries with different orientation in their higher education system (mainly due to differences in cultural and ideological perceptions) and keeping in mind that there is no ideal model for university governance, this study could enlighten decision makers in any country to develop a more effective and constructive model of university governance that would serve societal interests more effectively.

The African continent is filled with a textured history, vast resources, and immense opportunity. The landscape of higher education on such a diverse continent is extensive and complex. In this review of the landscape, four primary topics are evaluated. The historical context is the foundational heading, which briefly covers the evolution from colonization to independence and the knowledge economy. The second main heading builds upon the historical context to provide an overview of the numerous components of higher education, including language diversity, institutional type, and access to education. A third section outlines key challenges and opportunities including finance, governance, organizational effectiveness, and the academic core. Each of these challenges and opportunities is interconnected and moves from external influences (e.g., fiscal and political climate) to internal influences (e.g., administrative leadership and faculty roles). The last layer of the landscape focuses on leveraging higher education in Africa for social and economic progress and development. Shaping a higher education system around principles of the public good and generating social benefits is important for including postsecondary institutions in a development strategy.

This paper sets out in the wider context of globalization to examine how and what specific reform strategies the Government of the Hong Kong special administrative region (HKSAR) has adopted in reforming its higher education system to enhance the competitiveness of its higher education in the increasingly globalizing economic context. More specifically, this paper has chosen a focus to examine how, and in what way universities in Hong Kong have attempted to make themselves internationally competitive, and what systems have been introduced to assure quality.

This paper adopts a case study approach in examining recent higher education changes/reforms in Hong Kong. Using literature survey, documentary and policy analysis, intensive interviews, as well as field observations, the paper has provided a comprehensive review and a critical analysis of higher education governance in Hong Kong.

This paper has reviewed major higher education reforms in the HKSAR, with particular reference to examine how higher education institutions have changed the ways that they are governed and managed. Academics working in Hong Kong nowadays are confronted with increasing pressures from the government to engage in international research, commanding a high quality of teaching and contributing to professional and community services. As Hong Kong universities have tried to benchmark with top universities in the world, they are struggling very hard to compete for limited resources. “Doing more with less” and “doing things smarter” are becoming fashionable guiding principles in university management and governance. Internal competition in the university sector is inevitably becoming keener and intensified.

The paper discusses the case study of Hong Kong which reflects how a rapidly developed economies in East Asia have attempted to tackle the growing impact of globalization on higher education governance.

This paper provides a comprehensive picture of how the universities in Hong Kong have responded to increasingly intensified quality assurance pressures, and fills an identified information gap on specific strategies in promoting the international competitiveness of universities in the city‐state in East Asia.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent of voluntary disclosures in UK higher education institutions’ (HEIs) annual reports and examine whether internal governance structures influence disclosure in the period following major reform and funding constraints.

The authors adopt a modified version of Coy and Dixon’s (2004) public accountability index, referred to in this paper as a public accountability and transparency index (PATI), to measure the extent of voluntary disclosures in 130 UK HEIs’ annual reports. Informed by a multi-theoretical framework drawn from public accountability, legitimacy, resource dependence and stakeholder perspectives, the authors propose that the characteristics of governing and executive structures in UK universities influence the extent of their voluntary disclosures.

The authors find a large degree of variability in the level of voluntary disclosures by universities and an overall relatively low level of PATI (44 per cent), particularly with regards to the disclosure of teaching/research outcomes. The authors also find that audit committee quality, governing board diversity, governor independence and the presence of a governance committee are associated with the level of disclosure. Finally, the authors find that the interaction between executive team characteristics and governance variables enhances the level of voluntary disclosures, thereby providing support for the continued relevance of a “shared” leadership in the HEIs’ sector towards enhancing accountability and transparency in HEIs.

In spite of significant funding cuts, regulatory reforms and competitive challenges, the level of voluntary disclosure by UK HEIs remains low. Whilst the role of selected governance mechanisms and “shared leadership” in improving disclosure, is asserted, the varying level and selective basis of the disclosures across the surveyed HEIs suggest that the public accountability motive is weaker relative to the other motives underpinned by stakeholder, legitimacy and resource dependence perspectives.

This is the first study which explores the association between HEI governance structures, managerial characteristics and the level of disclosure in UK HEIs.

Tertiary education in the Anglophone Caribbean, particularly in Jamaica, has become highly competitive and complex and increasingly influenced by global neoliberal discourses. This free-market driven development is partly evidenced by the proliferation of national, regional, and international providers. Yet, within this seemingly unrelenting international influence, one can also detect more recent approaches by regional governments in concert and individually, through policy and systems of governance to reassert their sovereignty and retain some level of regulation and ownership of tertiary education. This chapter establishes an analytical framework for understanding these tertiary education governance changes by drawing on the principles of critical educational policy analysis. The chapter scrutinizes the multiple sources of power, international, regional, and national, that shape the rapid ongoing tertiary educational changes. Ultimately, the chapter argues that Jamaica’s tertiary education governance can be categorized as a shift from the governance mechanisms of “growth driven” to “regulatory control.” The chapter further posits that future regional shifts in tertiary education governance will be shaped by the continuing postcolonial struggles to adapt to the global order while protecting regional and national interests and aspirations.