Search results

The English sector is characterised by an expanding and increasingly differentiated set of higher education providers (HEPs) and an ever-more diverse student body. As a consequence, HEPs are as differentiated in their widening participation (WP) approaches as they are in every other aspect of the business of HE, and this has led to tensions between why and how they should go about the business of WP. Are HEPs driven by the desire to enhance social justice or merely responding to regulatory pressure? This chapter discusses how changing market regulatory regimes have interreacted with, and often conflicted with, institutional missions as they try to respond to the dual policy imperatives discussed in earlier chapters: the economic, human capital expansionary dynamic and the desire to enhance social justice through access to the HE system.

Entrepreneurship teachers (ETs) evolve in an environment where different categories of people interact: students, teachers and stakeholders. Assuming one or more identities or roles, teachers, practitioners, ex-entrepreneurs and/or researchers are the ‘transmitters’¹ of entrepreneurship education (EE). The question of recognition of teachers’ professional status is not always addressed (Hargreaves, 2000). Scientific research in EE shows certain weaknesses (Byrne, Fayolle, & Toutain, 2014; Fayolle, 2013), notably, a lack of interest in questions of (i) the perceived legitimacy of ETs and (ii) the support they receive in carrying out their work (particularly professional development). Taking a decidedly multidisciplinary perspective, this chapter aims to deal with the question of the perceived legitimacy of ETs using a literature review that covers all disciplines having shown an interest in the notion of teacher legitimacy.

The legitimacy of EE depends on the interactions between legitimate instructors and legitimate students in a given context, which respects certain collectively accepted norms. It also depends on the context and the objective of EE. Following the example of a university hospital worker (doctor), ETs can be practitioners, teachers and researchers. Their degree of expertise, position in the institution, positioning in relation to other actors – students, peers, colleagues, institutional and professional stakeholders – and the discourse they use are the elements that constitute their legitimacy.

Australian Universities have struggled to achieve higher education outcomes for Indigenous students. Rates of retention, attrition and withdrawal characterize the Indigenous higher education participation profile. An emerging Indigenous leadership within the academy provides universities with access to Indigenous standpoints. This chapter promotes the necessity of Indigenous standpoints if universities are to achieve transformation in Indigenous higher education outcomes.

The opportunities available to Indigenous Australians to enjoy a quality of life commensurate to non-Indigenous Australians are hampered by disproportionate rates of poor health, education and employment. A higher education qualification positions Indigenous people to access sustainable employment. Improving rates of Indigenous retention, decreasing attrition and increasing the number of graduates can transform current Indigenous experiences of disadvantage. Accessing Indigenous standpoints is integral to universities achieving these results.

While the concept of Indigenous standpoints has been proposed by other Indigenous scholars, these discussions have not contextualized the operations of this standpoint specifically within the milieu of university administration, management and governance. The intrinsic value of Indigenous standpoints has not gained traction within university executive management and is not readily understood in strategic planning or academic corporate cultures.

This chapter provides the context for understanding how English widening participation (WP) policy has interacted with the development of a marketised and expanding higher education (HE) system (the ‘dual imperative’ highlighted in the introductory chapter of this volume). It traces the intensification of market approaches in HE since 1997, examining how these interact with and become intertwined with evolving national WP policy concerns. Since 1997, WP for under-represented groups as a national policy aim has become firmly embedded in the activities undertaken by higher education providers (HEPs). Policy initiatives have moved between incentive and risk to encourage HEPs to address national and local inequalities of access and (later) student success and differential graduate outcomes. This chapter gives an overview of the key policy moments in this period and argues for how they have shaped the way in which the business of WP is enacted throughout the sector. It highlights how the business of WP drawn widely has become simultaneously a regulatory requirement, a way for institutions to differentiate themselves in the HE market and a key marker of institutional civic or social responsibilities. Situating this alongside the increasing focus on students and applicants as consumers, this chapter also begins to problematise the issues of collaboration and competition this creates.

Following critiques of shareholder capitalism and calls for reform of the corporation, employee-owned firms have attracted public and government attention in the UK and elsewhere, based on the view that these alternative organizations serve a broader public purpose. However, despite attempts to broaden the measures for evaluating organizations and take seriously the social effects of business decisions, we lack a holistic framework for evaluating this public purpose that addresses aspirations like participation, democracy, equality, solidarity, and strong community relations alongside financial resilience and profitability. This study proposes that a solution can be found in Selznick’s concept of “moral community.” Selznick argued that community, conceived as a response to the perceived unravelling of the social fabric, plays a vital role in countering the excesses of capitalism. Using this as a yardstick to evaluate employee ownership (EO) in the UK, the author argues that the EO organizational field is indeed an embodiment of a moral community. It successfully infuses a broad range of social values into economic pursuits, nurtures an inclusive sense of the “common good,” and mitigates the alienation resulting from an increasingly marketized society. At the same time, the EO moral community does not reject capitalism as such, aspiring to connect with and reform existing political, financial, and legal structures as opposed to positioning its own institutions as an alternative to them. There are, therefore, limits to the challenge that the EO community levels against the current socioeconomic order.

The clarion calls that African-American students are voicing throughout the nation’s predominantly white institutions (PWIs) make it instructive for PWIs to become intentional and exigent about the recruitment, retention, and development of African-American faculty. Too often, PWIs continue the refrain that African-American faculty in their respective disciplines do not exist. This chapter addresses how this happens based on a five-point model that offers strategies for campus leaders to advance diversity and inclusion.

The 2014 Condition of Education Report (National Center for Education Statistics, 2014) revealed that black undergraduate students made up 29% of private for-profit institutions, 13% at private nonprofit institutions, and 12% at public institutions. Comparatively, the number of black full-time instructional faculty at postsecondary institutions was only 6%. As a matter of equity, representation, and the collegiate experience of black students, PWIs are compelled to recruit and yield more Blacks in the professoriate.

Therefore, the author put forth a five-point model that offers systematic strategies for campus leaders to operationalize critical multiculturalism. The five points of the model are perspective, presence, position, promotion, and prosper, as displayed in Table 1.

The first two features of this model pertain to micro individual attitudes, while the latter four apply to macro organizational procedures that support mission-focused values. This model also offers a multitude of counsel that equip campus leaders to listen to students and alleviate institutional practices that stagnate, stymie, stifle, and stop a harvest of African-American faculty.

One of the consequences of the democratization of higher education in the United States is the explosion of institutions that have arisen to meet mass demand, and the stratification of those institutions based on the populations they serve. The Ivy League, the “public ivy” flagship state universities, and a cadre of elite small private liberal arts colleges are the basis for the institutionalized myths that inform public perception of what colleges or universities are, even though these schools account for an ever-shrinking fraction of American higher education experiences. The growth in schools serving primarily “nontraditional” students – that is, anything except in-person residential undergraduate liberal arts for at-least-middle-class white eighteen-year-olds with certain test scores coming directly from a college-preparatory high school program – has created a legitimacy paradox within the higher education sector. Democratization has created a need for different types of institutions, but the quest for legitimacy within the higher education sector drives isomorphic change and fuels mission creep, pulling schools away from their original nontraditional constituencies. In order to effectively serve nontraditional students, schools must explore other sectors outside of higher education where there is potential for creating programmatic and/or institutional legitimacy, including the business sector, specific professional sectors, and social/cultural milieu. The intentional development of multiliminality, where institutions draw legitimacy from multiple overlapping environmental sectors simultaneously, offers one response which helps anchor colleges and universities in their missions and helps maintain the access promised by the democratization of higher education.

The application of network theory and social network analysis (SNA) to tourism and hospitality is recent. Nonetheless, several authors have been applying the method contributing to regional planning, local-level tourism networks, tourism policy and governance, innovation, entrepreneurship, knowledge transfer, and learning. This chapter aims to characterize the use of SNA in tourism and hospitality research. Specifically, it intends to: (i) present the framework of SNA in a methodological perspective; (ii) perform a bibliometric analysis of SNA use in tourism and hospitality research; (iii) systematize the dimensions and metrics that researchers can use to apply SNA, namely the relevance for tourism; and (iv) present a case study analyzing tourism innovation networks. This chapter brings important contributions to tourism and hospitality research and practice, by focusing on the theoretical framework and practical application of SNA, providing relevant conceptual and practical knowledge that will empower researchers to use this method in tourism and hospitality studies.

In the United States, rights-based laws have opened major social institutions to previously marginalized groups, altering the terrain on which social movements act, creating opportunities for disruption, and expanding the forms protest takes. This research is an attempt to add to our understanding of contemporary protest. I use data from 50 open-ended, loosely structured interviews with women feminist PhD sociologists working at U.S. (and 1 Canadian) colleges and universities as a lens through which to examine contemporary protest. These in-depth interviews reveal that the demand-making and discursive protest of feminists in academia is rooted in the empowering intersections of their collective feminist identities and disrupts hegemonic practices in the academy and beyond. My findings indicate that social movement theory must move beyond restrictive notions of potential movement targets, activist locations, and strategies; and past narrow conceptualizations of collective action and movement goals.

The use of national and international rankings of universities is increasing rapidly. Dill and Soo (2005), who take a generally positive view of university league tables, review the performance of some leading examples of the genre. They conclude that “Our review of the five leading commercial university league tables from Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US suggests that the definitions of academic quality used in these tables are converging…It would be valuable to extend the analysis to league tables developed in Europe, Asia, and Latin America to see the extent to which a common construct of academic quality is becoming truly international” (Dill & Soo, 2005, pp. 525–526).